Great Bible Truths with Dr David Petts

Talk 6 A Summary, a Reminder, some Suggestions, and a Final Word of Encouragement

Hello again and welcome to my final talk in our series where we've been looking at New Testament Guidelines for Small Group Meetings.

My purpose in this series, which has been largely based on my book When You Come Together, has been to show that we should take seriously Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 14:26, and to encourage more Spirit-led participation in our meetings. The things that Paul wrote are after all, the commandments of the Lord (14:37). Let's begin with:

A quick summary of what we've said so far

To put 1 Corinthians 14:26 in context, we began by briefly examining chapters 12-14 and saw that there's a supernatural dimension to the worship of the church which is expressed in the manifestation of supernatural gifts given by the Holy Spirit (12:1-11).

We saw that the church is the body of Christ, that every member of the body is different, and that everybody is needed (12:12-30). This lies behind Paul's teaching in 14:26 that everyone should have opportunity to contribute to the meeting.

But for that to work properly, everything we do must be motivated by love (13:1-13) and as an expression of that love, we must always seek to put other people first (14:1-25). This is directly relevant to how 14:26 should be applied in practice. This includes taking responsibility for our actions (14:26-40) and using the spiritual gifts God has given us correctly.

We went on to examine Paul's teaching on tongues, interpretation, and prophecy in chapter 14, and sought to clarify the meaning of verses that are open to differences of interpretation. I suggested how these verses might be applied in practice, acknowledging that in everything we must submit to the authority of scripture (14:37).

And in our last talk we identified three key principles on which 1 Corinthians 14:26 is based. These are participation, variety, and edification. Most important of these is edification, building other people up spiritually. We said that this involves:

a) Putting other people first

b) Making sure that people can understand what's being said

c) Taking responsibility for what we do and say

d) Preserving order in our meetings

e) Ensuring there's a healthy balance in our activities (i.e. not too much of the same thing).

Finally, we have also admitted that certain verses in 1 Corinthians 14 are open to more than one interpretation. So let me now remind you of my answers to some of these controversial questions.

A reminder of my answers to some controversial questions

a) About speaking in tongues when unbelievers are present

As I understand 1 Corinthians 14, Paul does expect speaking in tongues to be a frequent part of our meetings, but he forbids speaking out loudly if there is no interpreter present. He also discourages this if there are unbelievers present. But we may speak quietly to ourselves and to God. However, speaking in tongues does not always put people off, particularly if they can understand it. So, in my view, we should probably discourage speaking out loud in tongues in the presence of unbelievers, but if it does happen, someone should interpret it and whoever is leading the meeting should explain what has just happened.

b) About the gift of interpretation of tongues

Here's how I answered the following questions:

i. Should this sound like praise or prophecy?

My answer was that, although it can take the form of a prophecy (often referred to as a 'message'), it can also be the interpretation of someone's praise or prayer in tongues.

ii. What does Someone must interpret mean (NIV v. 27)?

A better translation is, Let one person interpret. I suggested that Paul probably meant that only one person should interpret each utterance in tongues.

iii. Should a fourth utterance in tongues be interpreted?

My answer was yes, on the basis that it would be more edifying to the church than if it were not interpreted. However, this is unlikely to happen if church leaders teach clearly on how spiritual gifts should be operated.

c) About the gift of prophecy

The two main questions we answered here were about judging a prophecy.

i. Who should judge it?

I answered that church leaders like pastors, because of their role as shepherds of the flock, have a special responsibility here, but that we all need to do so.

ii. How do you judge it?

I emphasised that, although God's gifts are perfect, we are not!. God's gifts come through imperfect human channels, and that's why prophetic words need to be weighed carefully. To do so we should first ask ourselves if the prophecy is in line with Scripture. If it is, we should then ask ourselves questions like, Is this for me, or is it perhaps for someone else? Etc.

But that brings me to:

Some suggestions for church leaders

I deal with this in the final chapter of WYCT which is written particularly for church leaders. So it's not highly relevant in this series of talks to home groups. However, it could be useful for those of you who may be emerging church leaders, so I'll just mention the key points I make in that chapter and suggest that you might read it for yourselves. The points I make are about:

· Being fully persuaded in your own mind what the Bible teaches about this

· Praying for guidance

· Consulting your fellow leaders and making sure that you're all of one mind

· Teaching the people

· Setting an example in the use of the gifts

· Making space in the church programme

· Creating a loving atmosphere where the gifts can flourish.

If you'd like to know more, read WYCT Chapter 9 for yourself. But now:

A final word of encouragement to you all

Now that we've come to the end of this series, I want to encourage you all to put Paul's teaching into practice. He clearly wants everyone of us to participate in our meetings. As I've already said, leaders need to make time for this and encourage everyone to take part. And if you're one of those people who rarely if ever say anything, that's fine, but I want to encourage you to get started, even if it's something as simple as quoting or reading a favourite Bible verse. And if you're one of those who already has a lot to say, please consider holding back a bit to make time for others.

But this series has not just been about participation. It's been about variety. And that includes not only having a hymn or a word of instruction. It also involves supernatural gifts like tongues, interpretation, and prophecy. So I want to finish by sharing with you how to get started in this important area.

As many of you will know, I have recently preached on this in our church, and a video is available on YouTube. You can find the link by visiting our website www.brixhamcc.co.uk. Alternatively, you could listen to two podcasts I gave on the same subject in February 2019 by going to my website www.davidpetts.org. I mention this now because there's not time to cover the subject fully in this series of short talks, and what I'm about to say is just a quick summary of the main points.

A. We should desire them eagerly Paul uses the same word three times in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 (12:31, 14:1, 12). This is the most important thing. If you're not thirsty, you won't drink! To whet your appetite, maybe consider reading more about them.

B. We shouldn't make excuses 1. I'm not worthy

Paul refers to the gifts as charismata (12:4). This comes from charis 'grace'.

We don't receive them because we deserve them. We receive them because of God's grace.

Don't hold back from seeking spiritual gifts because you feel unworthy.

I'm not suitable

Paul also uses the word pneumatika (12:1), which in the context means supernatural.

So these particular gifts have nothing to do with our natural ability.

We shouldn't make excuses like I'm not talented enough – old enough – clever enough etc.

Our lack of ability doesn't limit God.

They're beyond my reach

Another word he uses is phanerosis (12:7) which means an outward evidencing of a latent principle.

The light that shines from a lightbulb is the evidence of electricity that's at work in it.

Supernatural gifts are the outward evidence of the power of the Holy Spirit at work in us.

They are not beyond your reach. They don't come from God in outer space. They come from the Holy Spirit who is in you.

C. We must keep filled with the Spirit

My little book, A New Dimension, explains what this means. The disciples were first filled with the Spirit when they were baptised in the Spirit at Pentecost. They then began to speak in tongues. Once we have been baptised in the Spirit, we need to fan this gift into flame (2 Timothy 1:6-7). Speaking in tongues regularly will build us up spiritually (14:4) and help us maintain the fulness of the Spirit.

D. We must pray for the gifts The Holy Spirit determines which of the gifts he will give us, but that doesn't mean that we may not pray for them (see 1 Corinthians 14:13). But how do I know what to pray for? Don't wait until you know which gift or gifts God wants you to have. Pray for what you would like. If the gift you're praying for is not for you, the Lord will guide you to what he desires. The important thing is to pray and to pray persistently. E. We must act in faith Mark 16:17,18 and Romans 12:6 reveal that spiritual gifts are operated by faith. And James 2:17 makes it clear that, if we really have faith, we will act. In the longer version of this talk I illustrate this by describing how I received the gift of interpretation of tongues.

So, that's it from me. Today I've not suggested any questions for discussion. Why not spend the time in prayer together for spiritual gifts? If you earnestly seek, you will receive.

View Details

Talk 5 Key Principles in 1 Corinthians 14:26

Hello again, and welcome to Talk 5 in our series on NT Guidelines for Small Group Meetings.

Today we're going to be seeking to identify the key principles underlying our key verse for this series, 1 Corinthians 14:26:

What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

I see three key principles in this verse, Participation, Variety, and Edification. Paul wants everyone to participate in the meeting. This will happen in a variety of ways. And the purpose of it all is to strengthen or edify the church.

Participation

Paul hardly needed to recommend that the Corinthians participate in their meetings. That was something they were doing already. The problem was not lack of participation, but too much participation in things that did not edify the church, like speaking in tongues without interpretation, and everyone speaking in tongues at the same time.

But despite these problems, Paul still wants them to participate. He just wants them to participate in the right way – for the strengthening of the church.

As we saw from chapter 12, every part of the body is needed. There should always be opportunity, whenever we gather, for the expression of the many gifts and graces that the Spirit has imparted to the members.

This should be easy enough in home groups, even if it's not always possible in church. But even there, I believe there should always be opportunity for them to do so

And they should be encouraged to do so. People are more likely to participate when time is specifically allocated for this, and it's made clear that participation is welcome. If we really want people to participate, we must make room for it.

Variety

Paul refers to:

a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation.

These are, of course, just a representative sample of what might happen in a meeting, but they suggest three main areas:

· The musical dimension (a hymn)

· The doctrinal dimension (a word of instruction)

· The supernatural dimension (a revelation, a tongue, etc).

We have already dealt with the supernatural dimension at some length. So we will confine our attention to the musical and doctrinal dimensions.

The musical dimension – everyone of you has a hymn

The first thing Paul refers to in 14:26 is a hymn. Actually, the word in Greek is literally a psalm, and everywhere else in New Testament it refers to one of the Psalms in the Old Testament. However, a psalm has been defined as a song or poem used in worship, so the translation hymn is quite appropriate.

But what exactly did Paul mean by having a psalm? At the very least, Paul is saying is that everyone should have the opportunity to contribute to the worship by having a song. But how do you have a song?

This must mean more than joining in the songs chosen in advance by the worship leader! So does he mean that everyone should have the opportunity to sing a solo?! Clearly not! So how can we put Paul's recommendation into practice?

Well, one way would be to do what we used to do years ago. We could give opportunity for people to choose a hymn for everyone to sing, or, in a time of open worship, to spontaneously start singing a well-known hymn or chorus for everyone to join in – but please don't do that if you've got a voice like mine! It's not your ministry!

I realise that this may not easily fit in with modern styles of worship where the pursuit of excellence in performance is important, but I do know from experience what a blessing it can be when someone in the congregation spontaneously has a song in one of the ways I have just suggested – and this should be easy enough to make room for in home groups .

But now I want to look at the only other reference to singing in 1 Corinthians 14, where in verse 15, talking about singing in tongues, Paul says:

I will sing with my spirit (in tongues), but I will also sing with my mind (in a language I understand).

We've already seen that this is part of what Paul is recommending for the use of tongues in private, but this raises the question as to whether singing in tongues is appropriate in public. There may be a reference to this in Ephesians 5:19, where Paul mentions spiritual songs along with psalms and hymns. KJV is more literal than NIV when it translates this as

speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord…

We know from 1 Corinthians 14 that speaking in tongues is one way of speaking to ourselves and to God (28) and that in doing so we are praying or singing with our spirit (14-15). However, in Ephesians 5:19 it's unclear whether Paul is envisaging a public or private situation. The reference to heart rather than hearts might suggest that he is speaking to them as individuals, whereas speaking to yourselves (plural) could be taken to refer to when they are gathered in worship.

Perhaps he intends both. At Pentecost the disciples were filled with the Spirit both collectively and individually. And we need, both as a church and as individuals within it, to keep on being filled with the Spirit. If I can sing in tongues privately to maintain the fulness of the Spirit, cannot the church do so collectively?

I confess that I was once rather concerned about this, especially when unbelievers were present, on the basis of what Paul says about them thinking we are mad (14:23). But then something happened that made me think again.

During part of the time when I was Principal of Mattersey Hall Bible College, the college chapel was across the road from the main part of our campus, and the students' worship could easily be heard by anyone passing by. There would often be times when everyone was spontaneously singing in tongues to worship the Lord, and I wondered what the local residents might think of it.

But I was greatly reassured when I heard that one of them had asked:

What is that beautiful singing I sometimes hear when I walk past your chapel? It's so unusual, and it gives me a great sense of peace.

As at Pentecost, there will always be those who criticise the moving of the Spirit, but if we are able to give an explanation of what's happening, as Peter did, there may well be more who are persuaded by our message than those who oppose it.

The doctrinal dimension – a word of instruction

The Greek word translated in NIV as a word of instruction is didache, which literally means teaching. It can also mean doctrine. Paul says relatively little about this in 1 Corinthians 14, but in verse 19 he stresses the importance of teaching when he says:

But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

And of course, most of the contents of Paul's letters were written to instruct the churches in the truth and to expose false doctrine. What we believe is of vital importance and every genuine experience of the Spirit finds its foundation in the truth of God's word.

There are many scriptures that emphasise the importance of doctrine. In WYCT Chapter 8, for example, I refer to Matthew 15:9 and 16:12, John 8:32, Colossians 2:22, 1 Timothy 4:13, 16, 2 Timothy 3:16, Titus 1:9 and 2:10, and 2 John 7-10.

The sound exposition of the Scriptures is essential whenever we come together. The teaching of the Word of God shouldn't be neglected in favour of other things. As we'll see later, there needs to be balance in our meetings.

Edification

This is the major theme of the whole chapter. If love is the dominant theme of chapter 13, in chapter 14 edification is the way that love is expressed in the context of the gathered church. That's why Paul says everything must be done for the strengthening of the church.

We have already looked at Paul's specific teaching on tongues, interpretation, and prophecy in some detail, but now we need to consider the key principles that underly that teaching and see if they can be applied more widely than the specific issues Paul was addressing in Corinth. As we do so, we will discover five principles that need to be applied if our meetings are to be edifying.

Putting other people first

This is the principle underlying Paul's teaching in verses 1-5. There he is saying that in church prophecy is more valuable than tongues because when you speak in tongues you edify only yourself, but if you prophesy you will edify others. He picks up the same theme in verse 17:

You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified.

The principle underlying this teaching is putting others first. And that principle can be applied far more widely than the issue of speaking in tongues. For example, it's good that I have the freedom to stand and worship the Lord while others are sitting down, but if by standing I prevent the person behind me from singing because they cannot see the words on the screen in front, I may be 'giving thanks well', but the other person is not edified. We need to be considerate to others in the way we worship the Lord.

And perhaps those of us who frequently lead in prayer, and sometimes several times in a meeting, might consider holding back to make space for others so do so. As my old pastor, Alfred Webb, used to say, Please don't take more than your fair share of the cake!

Intelligibility

Another of the ways we can build up our fellow Christians is by making sure they can understand. In verse 9 Paul says:

Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying?

Of course, he's talking about the futility of speaking in tongues in church unless it's interpreted. It's pointless unless people can understand it. But that's true of everything we do in church. Not everything we say in English is easy to understand – but it should be!

This applies to our preaching, our prayers, the songs we sing, our praise and worship – everything. In verse 16 it's clear that Paul expects that everyone present should be able to say Amen to whatever we say, but to do that they must first understand it,

…how can one who… does not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?

For example, how can I say Amen to someone's prayer or praise if I can't make out what they're saying because the people around me are making too much noise, or if the background music is too loud? Saying Amen means expressing your agreement with what's been said, and you can't do that if you haven't heard it properly.

Responsibility

As we saw in the last talk when discussing prophets and prophecy, Paul says that

The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets (32).

This implies that both prophets and those who have the gift of prophecy are responsible for what they say and how they use their gifts. But the need to take responsibility for our actions goes far wider than the gift of prophecy. If God has entrusted us with any spiritual gift, we are responsible for how we use it.

For example, the Holy Spirit does not force us to speak in tongues. He enables us to do so. We are responsible for when, how often, and how loudly. This principle applies to everything we do in church. We are to follow the teaching of Scripture and of our leaders (37-38) and we cannot make the excuse: I couldn't help it. The Holy Spirit made me do it. And, as we have already said, the very fact that Paul gave us instructions on how these gifts should be used shows that we are responsible for how we use them.

Order

Paul says that God is not a God of disorder but of peace (33), and it's our responsibility to see that everything is done in a fitting and orderly way (40). In the context this meant ensuring that speaking in tongues should be done one at a time and that only one person should interpret each utterance (27). And the same principle applied to the use of prophecy (30).

Paul's specific teaching on this still applies today, but the wider principle holds good for everything we do. Everything should done in a fitting and orderly way.

Balance

Finally, it's clear from Paul's teaching that there needs to be a measure of balance in our meetings. In Corinth there was too much speaking in tongues. In another church it might be too much music, or even too much teaching! If there is to be the variety of which Paul speaks in verse 26, and if each member is to have the opportunity to contribute, leaders need to ensure that there is a healthy balance in each meeting.

But that is not to say that there cannot be special occasions when an entire meeting is given over to teaching, or to prayer, or to worship, for example. Such occasions are not to be confused with our regular meetings, where preserving a measure of balance will be essential to the edification of all God's people.

Summary

There are three principles underlying Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 14:26 – participation, variety, and edification.
Our meetings should include the supernatural, the musical and the doctrinal.
Most important of all, everything should be done for the edification of the church.
That will be achieved by:

a) putting others first

b) making sure that what is said is intelligible

c) taking responsibility for our actions

d) preserving order and balance in our meetings.

That's it from me for today. Now over to group leaders for questions for discussion.

Questions for discussion

How could we implement Paul's recommendation to have a song in our meetings?
How much time should be allocated for teaching in our home groups?
How can we show more consideration for others by what we do in our meetings? Consider different ways of putting other people first.
How can we ensure that everything is done in a fitting and orderly way?
How can we encourage those who rarely, if ever, say anything in our meetings to participate more, and those who participate regularly (and maybe a bit too much?) to participate less? Which category do you come into?

View Details

Talk 4 The Right Use of Prophecy

Hello again and welcome to Talk 4 in our series on NT Guidelines for Small Group Meetings.

In our last two talks we were looking at Paul's teaching on tongues and interpretation. Today our subject is the gift of prophecy. We will consider what it is, its value and purpose, its limitations, and how it should be used in our meetings.

What is prophecy?

People sometimes confuse prophecy with foretelling the future, but its basic meaning is speaking on behalf of someone else. In the Bible it's usually used to refer to speaking on behalf of God. And obviously, if you're going to speak on behalf of God you need to hear from him first. This happens by the revelation of the Holy Spirit.

In Old Testament times and right up to Acts 2 in the New Testament, the Spirit was given to relatively few people, but from Pentecost onwards the gift of the Spirit was made available to all God's people. So prophecy in the New Testament worked rather differently from how it worked before Pentecost. There are now three different ways in which we may be said to prophesying:

When we tell others about Jesus we are speaking on God's behalf and so there's a sense in which we're 'prophesying'. This is something all Christians can, and should, do.
If we have received the spiritual gift of prophecy, when we use it we are prophesying. But this gift is not given to everyone. See 1 Corinthians 12:8-11, Romans 12:6).
If we have the ministry of a prophet, our prophecies may well contain supernatural revelation about the future. See, for example Agabus (Acts 11:27-28, 21:10). Not all Christians, and not even all who have the gift of prophecy, have this ministry.

There isn't time to go into all these three ways in these talks, but if you want more on this you'll find it in WYCT Ch. 7, and Body Builders Chapters 9 and 12. In this series we'll be limiting our attention to the spiritual gift of prophecy, because that's mainly what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 14, where he describes it like this:

… everyone who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort (v3).

It's listed among the supernatural gifts Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10. So, perhaps we could best define it as:

The supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit which enables us to speak to others on behalf of God by the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort .

So, it's not the same as when we bring a brief encouraging word during an open time of prayer or worship. It's only when there's a distinctly supernatural element that such 'words' are really the gift of prophecy.

The value and purpose of prophecy

Paul valued prophecy very highly indeed. He begins 1 Corinthians 14:1 by saying:

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.

This is the main theme of the chapter. And he ends the chapter as he has started it:

Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy… (39).

And we've seen in previous talks why he values it so highly. It's because it edifies the church (1 Corinthians 14:4-5). That's why he wants to us be passionate about it! Because …everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort (v.3).

This, in the context of church worship, is the practical outworking of Paul's teaching about love in chapter 13. We are to love our fellow Christians, and if we love them we will want to be a blessing to them, to strengthen, encourage, and comfort them. And that's what prophecy does.

But that's not all. Prophecy can also have a powerful effect on unbelievers who may come into the church.

24 …if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, 25 and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

So, prophecy is to be valued very highly, not only because it strengthens, encourages, and comforts believers, but also because of the powerful effect it can have on people who do not yet believe.

But having said that, prophecy is not without its limitations. In 13:9-10 Paul says:

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.

This is because at present our knowledge is incomplete. We see but a poor reflection as in a mirror (12). Our prophecies are imperfect because they are our prophecies, and we are not perfect yet.

That's why in 14:12 Paul tells us to try to excel in it. If our use of God's precious gifts were perfect, we would not need to try to excel in them – in fact all Paul's instructions about their use would have been unnecessary!

And that's why we're told in 14:29 that we should weigh carefully what is said.

But that brings us to how prophecy should be used in our meetings.

The use of prophecy in our meetings

Perhaps the first thing to say about the use of prophecy in our meetings is that we should always bear in mind its purpose, which is to strengthen, encourage, comfort, and edify God's people (3-4).

There is no suggestion that it should be used to rebuke them, or even to give them guidance.

Paul tells us in Romans 8:14 that it's our privilege as God's children to be personally led by the Spirit . Guidance received through prophecy should simply serve as confirmation of something that God has already spoken to us about in our hearts.

A good example of this is found in Acts 13:1-3 where the prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch were told by the Holy Spirit to set Barnabas and Paul apart for the work to which he had already called them. Similarly, in Acts 21:1-15, Agabus predicts what will happen to Paul, but he does not tell him what to do.

Paul's specific teaching (29-32)

29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32 The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets.

Two or three prophets should speak (29)

Paul may be using the word prophet here to refer to people like Agabus, or he could be meaning those who exercise the simple gift of prophecy. Either way, the principles he is teaching apply to both. The first of these is that, although prophecy is to be encouraged, its use is to be limited, and it needs to be judged or weighed carefully.

The others should weigh carefully what is said (29)

The verb translated weigh carefully is the same as is used for distinguishing between spirits in 12:10. The clear implication is that every prophecy needs to be evaluated. It's not infallible.

However, despite its limitations, Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5:19-20 that it's not to be despised. But even that may indicate the possibility of human weakness in the operation of the gift. This could be why the Thessalonians had been despising it!

So prophecy needs to be judged or weighed carefully. But this raises two questions. The first is: Who is responsible for judging it?

Looking at the immediate context, Paul seems to mean the other prophets. The things of the Spirit are spiritually discerned (2:14), and those with a prophetic gift are more likely to weigh a prophetic revelation accurately.

But surely the others may be applied more widely than that? Certainly, pastors or teachers have a special responsibility here, and in the context of a small group perhaps the group leader has too. We need to be alert for anything that might mislead God's people.

But it's not just leaders who have this responsibility. We all have! We all have the capacity, and the responsibility, to weigh prophetic words. But that leads us to the second question:

How is prophecy to be judged?

There are two areas of importance here, its authenticity and its application.

By authenticity I mean, first of all, its conformity to Scripture. Paul is very clear in verse 37 that what he is writing… is the Lord's command. All prophecy must be judged in the light of what the Spirit has already said in the Bible. But judging is more than an intellectual exercise based on our Bible knowledge. There is a spiritual dimension to it too. A 'word' may be in line with Scripture, but it may not be what the Spirit is emphasising to us right now.

By application I mean that we need to consider to whom the prophecy may apply. Is it for me? Is it for the whole church? How do we apply it in practice?

These are decisions that we all must make after hearing a prophecy. Clearly, we cannot judge it until we have heard it! However, in some churches people who feel they have a prophetic word to bring are expected to share it with the church leadership before bringing it publicly. The church leaders evaluate it before it is given. The advantages of this are twofold:

· It prevents any unauthentic or inappropriate prophecy being given in public.

· Those who are inexperienced, but eager to prophesy, feel more secure in having their prophecy confirmed by the leaders before bringing it.

We sometimes encourage this in our church, but at the same time we don't want those who have a proven track record in prophecy to feel they have to consult the church leaders before they prophesy. Their prophecies should be judged after they have delivered them, which is clearly what Paul had in mind in the verse we're looking at.

What's more, to insist that leaders must be consulted before prophecies are given seems out of keeping with the encouragement Paul gives in verse 26 for all to participate, and with the spontaneity implicit in his teaching on the matter in verse 30.

And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop (30)

This shows:

· the spontaneity that Paul envisages in Christian meetings – there was no set liturgy

· prophecy may also contain an element of revelation

· the importance of making room for others.

For you can all prophesy in turn (31)

This doesn't mean that everyone in the meeting can prophesy, because not everyone has the gift. And I think it's unlikely that he means that everyone with the gift can prophesy in every meeting! Like tongues and interpretation, he limits prophetic words to two or three (v29). There's good sense in this, because if we get too many people bringing too many 'words' we can't possibly take it all in!

The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets (32)

All the gifts God gives us are under our control. This is clear from the fact that specific instructions are given for their use. If the use of the gifts were only dependent upon the Holy Spirit himself, such instructions would be both inappropriate and unnecessary.

That's why Paul teaches that we are able to:

· regulate the number of prophetic utterances in any one meeting (14:29).

· cease prophesying if something is revealed to someone else (14:30).

· prophesy rather than speak in tongues if unbelievers are present (14:23-25).

Our ability to control the gift of prophecy also implies that we are responsible for the way we express the message God has given us. I may believe that God has given me something to say, but I am not God, and I should not talk as if I were! And neither should you!

So please, prophesy, but don't say 'I'.

For example, it would be better to say

The Lord loves you... than to say, I love you.

Avoid giving the impression that you are God!

But that now brings us to the final verses of 1 Corinthians 14. Note that verses 34-35 relate to women asking their husbands at home. It does not relate to women praying or prophesying in meetings, which Paul clearly allowed subject to the social conditions prevailing at the time (11:5).

In verse 37 he insists that what he is writing is the Lord's command. Paul was a church leader and he was writing Scripture. Anyone who is truly spiritual will submit to the authority of Scripture and respect their church leaders.

Finally, prophecy is to be encouraged, and tongues should not be forbidden (39). And whatever happens, everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way (40).

That's it. That's all from me for now. Thanks for listening. Now, over to group leaders for questions for discussion. The Lord bless you.

Questions for discussion

From what you've heard, how do you think we can distinguish between a brief encouraging 'word' and the gift of prophecy?
Why do you think Paul wants us to be eager to prophecy?
How can we encourage the use of this important gift in church and in our home groups?
Might a group discussion be a good way to evaluate a prophetic word?
You feel that a prophecy might be specifically for you, but you're not quite sure. What should you do?

View Details

Talk 3 The Right Use of Interpretation of Tongues

Hello again. Welcome to Talk 3 in our series on NT Guidelines for Small Group Meetings.

Last time, our subject was speaking in tongues and its right use in our meetings. We saw that we should not speak in tongues loudly unless it's for interpretation and that it must only be spoken loudly if someone is there to interpret it.

So today we'll be looking in more detail at the important gift of interpretation of tongues. Apart from two references in chapter 12 (v10 and v30), our main source of material for understanding this gift is found in 1 Corinthians 14, so it would be good to have your Bible open there. In this talk I will:

· Examine the references to interpretation of tongues

· Discuss certain practical issues that arise from this

· Finish with a brief summary.

A. References to interpretation of tongues

1 Corinthians 12:10-11, 30

10 …and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?

These verses make clear that not everybody has this gift. Each gift is given as the Holy Spirit determines. (By the way, speaking in tongues in verse 30 refers to its use in church, not to its private use as prayer with one's spirit).

1 Corinthians 14:5

The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless they interpret so that the church may be edified.

This verse reveals the purpose of the gift – the edification of the church. As we saw in our last talk, prophesying is preferable to speaking in tongues because prophecy edifies the church whereas speaking in tongues does not, because no one can understand it (2).

However, if speaking in tongues is interpreted, it can edify the church, in which case it is as valuable as prophecy. But this need not mean that it's necessarily the same as prophecy. We will discuss this in more detail in a moment.

1 Corinthians 14:13

In verse 12 Paul tells the Corinthians to try to excel in gifts that build up the church. This gives the reason for what he says in verse 13.

Anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret…

Why? Because the only way that speaking in tongues will edify others is if it is interpreted.

Notice too that the verse does not mean that all interpretations should be given by the person who has spoken in tongues. The interpretation may very well be given by someone else. To allow someone other than the speaker in tongues to interpret means that more people are participating in the meeting, something Paul is keen to encourage, as the next passage makes clear.

Verses 26-28

26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two – or at the most three – should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret.

28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

Verse 26 is the key verse upon which this series is based. It gives clear guidance on the sort of things we should expect in our meetings. Notice that tongues and interpretation are included in what Paul is recommending. But note the use of the word if in verse 27:

If anyone speaks in a tongue…

The manifestation of spiritual gifts will vary from meeting to meeting as the Spirit leads. The main point is that whatever is taking place, everything must be done for the strengthening of the church.

So, if anyone speaks in tongues, what should happen next? Paul is quite clear on this:

If anyone speaks in a tongue, let it be by two or at the most three people. And let one person interpret (my translation).

This doesn't refer to private use of tongues in church, which is allowed, provided it's done quietly, speaking to yourself and to God (28). It refers to the use of tongues for the purpose of interpretation, because Paul says, Let one person interpret. So, during the course of a meeting, no more than three people should speak in tongues with a view to interpretation.

Another practical issue that we will need to consider in due course is how to understand and apply the final part of verse 27, which NIV translates as, Someone must interpret, but which KJV translates this as,

Let one interpret (my emphasis),

which is the literal translation of the Greek word that Paul uses here. That's why, in the translation I offered earlier, I translated it as

Let one person interpret.

But this doesn't mean that Paul is saying that if there are two or three utterances in tongues, the same person should give the interpretation for all of them. But more on this in a moment.

Finally, Paul's use of the word interpreter in verse 28 is interesting. He says:

If there is no interpreter, the speaker (in tongues) should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

So, if we want to speak in tongues publicly, we need to check that there's an interpreter present. And if there is, we are free to go ahead. Obviously that places a serious responsibility on the interpreter to be ready to interpret at any time, because we do not know when someone is going to speak in tongues. To know more about receiving spiritual gifts, you might like to visit my website (www.davidpetts.org) and listen to two short podcasts I gave in February 2019 (podcasts 018 and 019).

B. Practical issues arising from Paul's teaching

i. The form the gift should take – prophecy or praise?

There's no time to go into much detail about this now, but I have said a bit more in WYCT pp77-79 and more still in Body Builders pp141-144.

However, the short answer is this. As we saw last time, tongues can take the form of prayer or praise or giving thanks. So, if the gift of interpretation enables us to understand what is being said when someone speaks in tongues, it follows that the interpretation should take the same form as the tongue, whether prayer, or praise, or thanksgiving etc.

But what about 'messages' in tongues where the interpretation sounds like a prophecy? Those who take the view that interpretation should take the form of a prophecy base their argument on 14:5 where Paul says:

The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless they interpret so that the church may be edified.

The argument goes like this. Prophecy edifies the church. Interpretation edifies the church. Therefore, the interpretation of tongues equals prophecy. But there is a logical flaw in this argument.

It's like saying, Tea is a drink. Coffee is a drink. Therefore, tea equals coffee!

Paul says that both prophecy and interpretation edify the church, but that does not necessarily mean that they do so in the same way. If, for example, interpretation were to take the form of praise, rather than prophecy, wouldn't it edify the church? And who is not edified by the psalms of praise? I have personally been greatly edified by both forms of interpretation.

However, other people insist on praise interpretations and base their argument on the NIV translation of 14:2, which reads:

For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him…

So, it is argued, if the tongue is to God, the interpretation must be to God, in the form of either praise or prayer. However, a more literal translation would be:

For the person speaking in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him… (my translation).

It follows, therefore, that if tongues in church can be understood through the use of the gift of interpretation, it can most certainly speak to us. So in my view both praise and prophecy style interpretations are legitimate manifestations of the gift, and we should accept and encourage both.

ii. Two or at the most three…

The meaning is clear, but what should we do if someone brings a fourth utterance in tongues? Should it be interpreted?

Of course, this is unlikely to happen if the church has been taught how spiritual gifts should be operated in our meetings.

However, if it does happen, what should we do? My view is that it should be interpreted because this would be more edifying for the church which is the basic principle behind Paul's teaching in this passage.

For more detail on this, please see WYCT pp79-80.

iii. 'Let one person interpret' (v27)

I said earlier that the Greek in verse 27 is best translated as, Let one person interpret. This in fact reflects how the Authorised Version translates it and, as a result, some churches have taught that, if there are two or three utterances in tongues, the same person should give the interpretation for all of them.

This is a valid application of what Paul is saying, but I think it more likely that his intention is to say that each utterance in tongues needs only one person to interpret it. The unruly members of the Corinthian church needed to hear this.

C. Summary

Everything we do in church should be edifying to others.
Tongues edifies you, but it doesn't edify others, unless it's interpreted.
So, the purpose of the gift of interpretation is to edify the church.
Tongues may take the form of prayer or praise or prophecy, so interpretations may take any of these forms.
We should not speak loudly in tongues unless there is an interpreter there. So we need to be sure there's an interpreter there before we speak out loudly in tongues.
If we speak in tongues aloud in church, we should pray for the gift of interpretation, bearing in mind that it's not given to everyone.
If you have the gift of interpretation, you have a responsibility to interpret.
Tongues and interpretation should occur no more than two or three times in each meeting.
Only one person should interpret each message, but it doesn't have to be the same person each time.
Since it's so important for tongues in church to be interpreted, we should all wait for the interpretation to be given before doing anything else (like leading in prayer etc.).

D. Questions for discussion

Why do you think we should all wait for the interpretation to be given before doing anything else?
Someone speaks out loud in tongues, but no one else interprets it. You have interpreted tongues in the past, but you don't feel you have the interpretation of this time. What should you do? Hint: See my personal testimony about this, in WYCT pp.81-83 or Body Builders, Ch. 8.
Do we need to alter our group's way of doing things to make way for the operation of gifts like tongues and interpretation (and indeed other gifts of the Spirit)?

View Details

Talk 2 The Right Use of Speaking in Tongues

Welcome to Talk2 in our series on NT Guidelines for Small Group Meetings.

We started last time by suggesting that 1 Corinthians 14:26 should be taken as a serious indication of the sort of thing God wants to happen when we meet. Let me remind you what it says:

What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

We then did a quick survey of chapters 12 and 13 to see how they might influence our understanding of this verse.

Today we're going to talk about speaking in tongues which was very important in the life of the early church and is still a very valuable gift today. So we'll be talking about why it's so important both in our personal prayers at home and in our gatherings. And we'll finish by looking at 1 Corinthians 14 and seeing what Paul has to say about exactly how it should be used when we meet together.

A. The importance of tongues

1. Its importance in the early church

a. As we all know, speaking in tongues was the first spiritual gift that the disciples were given when they were filled the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4). empowering them for service (Acts 1:8). [For more on this, please see A New Dimension – how to be filled with the Holy Spirit (details on my website – www.davidpetts.org].

b. After Pentecost, when others received the Spirit, it was the first manifestation recorded after the Spirit came upon them (Acts 10:44-46, Acts 19:1-6).

c. This was almost certainly because speaking in tongues was to become an important part of a Christian's prayer life, enabling them to pray with their spirit (1 Corinthians 14:14), but more of that in a moment.

2. The value of the gift today

Speaking in tongues was a valuable gift in New Testament times and it's just as valuable today:

a. It can be used as a powerful sign to unbelievers as happened in Acts 2 and led to some 3000 people becoming Christians.

b. It is an important aspect in our private prayer times

c. It can be a blessing in church when it is accompanied by the gift of interpretation, which will be the subject of out next talk.

So let's now turn to 1 Corinthians 14 and see what Paul has to say about the use of tongues in our private prayer times, before we turn to its use in our meetings.

B. The use of tongues in private

Consider the following:

2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.

4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.

14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.

16 If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?

17 You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.

So when we speak in tongues:

· we don't know what we're saying (14),

· but we're speaking to God (2)

· which may be prayer (14-15), or praise (16), or giving thanks (16-17) to God,

· and in doing so we're edifying ourselves (building ourselves up spiritually) (4).

This is probably why in 2 Timothy 1:6-7 Paul says:

6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands.

7 For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline

Every time we speak in tongues in our prayer time we are fanning into flame the gift of God that we received when God gave us the Holy Spirit.

So speaking in tongues is a great thing to do in private, but what about in our meetings?

C. The right use of tongues in our meetings

1. Edification – the underlying principle

It's clear that Paul valued very highly his ability to speak in tongues. In verse 18 he says:

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.

This was because it enabled him to pray with his spirit rather than just praying with his mind.

But please note what he says in verse 19:

But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

So, although he spoke in tongues a great deal when he was not in church – that is, when he was in private – he did not do so in public. He is much more guarded about the use of tongues in church. Look at verses 3-5 again:

3 But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.

He wants everyone to be able to speak in tongues, but it has no value in church if it's not interpreted (v5).

Tongues are unintelligible unless they are interpreted and without interpretation the speaker is just speaking into the air (9).

But when interpreted they can fulfil a similar function to prophecy, which also edifies the church (4) bringing strengthening, encouragement and comfort (3).

We'll come back to that in our next talk when we consider Paul's teaching on the gift of interpretation of tongues, but for now it's enough to note that what's important is:

whatever we do in our meetings should be for the edification, strengthening, encouragement and comfort of those present.

For example, Paul is concerned about what happens if unbelievers come into our meetings.. He deals with this in verses 21-25 where it's clear that, despite the miracle that happened at Pentecost where speaking in tongues led to the conversion of some 3000 people, far from expecting unbelievers to come to faith when hearing speaking in tongues, Paul thinks it more likely that they will conclude that the Corinthians are out of their mind!

Why did he think this? Perhaps because situations like the day of Pentecost are very rare. On the vast majority of occasions, it's not likely that any foreigner will recognise their language when we are speaking in tongues. So Paul advises caution. On the basis of all this, it's better, in my view, to consider the use of tongues as a sign to unbelievers as something exceptional.

Having said that, verses 21-25 are extremely difficult because they contain an apparent contradiction and have long been a source of debate among scholars. We don't have time to go into them in now, but if you want to see a possible solution, please read WYCT pp. 66-68.

The main point is this:

Whatever we do in our meetings we should always be sensitive to the needs of others, especially if there are newcomers present.

You may be worshipping well, but if others are not helped by it, you are not acting in love! (My paraphrase of verse 17).

In the context Paul is talking about tongues, but the principle surely applies to everything we do in our meetings!

2. Paul's teaching on how to apply this principle

Despite Paul's clear teaching that prophecy is preferable to tongues (1-5), he by no means discourages the use of tongues in church. He expects speaking in tongues to be a regular part of the worship of the church (26) and it is certainly not to be forbidden (39).

However, the key to its use in church is that it needs to be interpreted so that everyone may be edified. In fact, in verse 28 he tells us that

If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

This suggests that the personal use of tongues in church is not prohibited, but it must be done quietly as it will edify no one except the speaker (cf. 4). Speaking out loud in tongues, therefore, is to be strongly discouraged unless it is intended that it be interpreted, and that of course will require someone with the gift of interpretation to be present.

This may, of course, be the person who has spoken in tongues, as in verses 12-13 Paul encourages those who speak in tongues to pray for the gift of interpretation:

So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. 13 For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.

So, if you want to speak out loud in tongues and don't have the gift of interpretation, you must first make sure that someone is present who does, and, if you're not sure, you must speak quietly to yourself and to God (28). There's just as much blessing in speaking in tongues quietly as in speaking loudly!

However, if an interpreter is present, you may speak out loud in tongues with a view to its being interpreted for the edification of the church. But this is subject to the following conditions:

If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at the most three, should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret (27).

So please, if someone speaks out loud in tongues in a meeting, wait until it's interpreted before you say anything.

D. Summary

Speaking in tongues is the ability to speak a language we have never learned.

It may be expressed in a variety of ways, including, prayer, praise, thanksgiving etc.

When we speak in tongues it's our spirit that is praying, not our mind.

God gives us this gift to help us edify ourselves – to build ourselves up spiritually.

It is also given so that when it's interpreted it will edify the church.

It can also be used as a sign to unbelievers when, as at Pentecost, they understand the language that is being spoken.

We should expect this gift to be in operation in our meetings, but it should be used quietly if it is not for interpretation.

It must only be spoken aloud if an interpreter is present, and it must be used only two, or at the most three, times in a meeting.

We will consider this further in the next talk when we examine Paul's teaching on the gift of interpretation.

For more on this, please see WYCT Ch. 5.

But there's much more that could be said, and, if you have a copy, you might like to read Chapter Eight of my book Body Builders – Gifts to make God's people grow.

E. Questions for discussion

If you do not yet speak in tongues, bearing in mind its value in prayer, do you feel you would like to? Have you ever prayed for this gift?
If you do speak in tongues, how much use do you make of it in your personal prayer life?
In church or in your small group, do you always consider the edification of others before you take part?
How best could we make use of this wonderful gift (tongues) in our small group meetings?

View Details

NT Guidelines for Small Group Meetings Talk 1 An Overview of 1 Corinthians 12-13

Welcome to our new series. I'm calling it New Testament Guidelines for Small Group Meetings.

We'll be looking at what the New Testament has to say about what we should expect and how we should behave in our meetings. This includes what we do on Sunday mornings and in our home groups.

Our thoughts will centre on what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:26 where he makes the following recommendation:

What then shall we say brothers and sisters? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

The churches in the New Testament would often have gathered in homes and that was almost certainly the case in Corinth. So, Paul's instructions are particularly relevant to smaller churches or home groups.

Small group meetings can take many different forms. Some meetings can be a real blessing and a source of edification to all, but sadly this is not always the case. The apostle Paul had to tell the Corinthians that their meetings were not for the better, but for the worse (1 Corinthians 11:17) because of their inconsiderate behaviour towards one another.

And that was when they were celebrating the Lord's Supper! Some were getting drunk while others were going hungry! And this selfish behaviour was not limited to food and drink. Some of them were 'hogging it' when it came to how they expressed themselves in worship – and that, as we will see, was perhaps their major problem.

Paul's teaching in the rest of chapter 11 and in those that follow was an attempt to put things right and to show what Christian gatherings should be like. And that will be the basis for our consideration of how we may make our small group meetings as beneficial as possible. We'll begin in this talk by giving a brief overview of Paul's teaching in chapters 12 and 13. This will help us to understand our key verse in the wider context.

As many of you will know, I have already written a short book on this subject entitled, When you come together – God's plans for when his people meet (WYCT). This contains much more than I have time to include in these notes, so please see me if you'd like a copy.

Before the meeting it would be really helpful if you read 1 Corinthians, chapters 12-14. And if you have a copy you might like to read WYCT chapters 1-3 if you have time.

So, as I was saying, our key verse is 1 Corinthians 14:26 and we need to begin by looking at the context in which it's set.

Setting the context – an overview of 1 Corinthians 12 to 14

There were plenty of problems with the church in Corinth. Chapters 1-10 make it clear that there were divisions, they were immature, they tolerated immorality, they were taking each other to court, and some of them lacked a basic understanding of the basic truths of the Christian faith. And on top of all that, their behaviour when they met together was at times appalling! They were thoughtless and inconsiderate.

No wonder Paul said that their meetings did more harm than good. We need to remember this as we look at what he says in chapters 12-14. The main problem he is addressing throughout is their thoughtless behaviour and attitude towards each other. It's clear from chapter 12 that some of them thought that they were superior to the others because of the spiritual gifts they possessed. And this was particularly true of speaking in tongues which was being used excessively in their meetings. So in chapter 12 he begins by giving some basic teaching on spiritual gifts.

Teaching on spiritual gifts (12:1-11)

I'm hoping you've read these verses before coming to the meeting. What's clear is that the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit were a regular part of their meetings, but the Corinthians were exercising them in ignorance. Paul had to teach them that:

The supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit must be distinguished from demonic manifestations by the acknowledgment that Jesus is Lord (vv1-3)
Though the gifts are different they are all given by the same Spirit (vv4-10)
They are given as the Holy Spirit determines (v11)

What can we learn from this?

If you acknowledge Jesus as you Lord and Saviour, you need not fear that you will receive a demonic gift. Our heavenly Father doesn't give 'snakes' to his children (Luke 11:11-13).
In Spiritualism, where counterfeit gifts are given by demons, different gifts are given by different spirits.
Though they're different, all the gifts are important because it's the Holy Spirit who gives all of them.
As the Holy Spirit is the giver, He decides who gets what.

NOTE: Paul will say much more about spiritual gifts in the next two chapters.

Every member of the body is needed (12:12-30)

In this passage we learn that:

The church is one body which has many different members (v14)
Every member of the body is important and needed because God has put it there (vv14-27)
There should be no division in the body, but all the members should have equal concern for each part of it (v25)

These are all important principles to bear in mind in our group meetings. There isn't time to go into them now, but we'll pick up on some of them when we come to chapter 14.

1 Corinthians 13 We're Nothing without Love

Paul's teaching on love in this chapter is valuable in every situation, but in its context Paul is still talking about what should go on in our meetings. Chapter 14 is a practical application of what he's teaching about love here in 13.

Let's divide the chapter into three sections:

It's all meaningless without love (1-3)
The nature of love (4-7)
Recognising our limitations (8-12)

It's all meaningless without love (1-3)

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

What can we learn from these verses?

Nothing is more important than love. Whatever gifts we may have and whatever we may do, if our motive is not love, it counts for nothing. Without love I am nothing (2) and I gain nothing (3).
This principle applies to every function of the body of Christ, not just to the things mentioned in these verses, which are just illustrations of it.
What he's taught about the body in chapter 12 will only be possible when we love one another. So the things he refers to in verses 1-3 are just illustrations of the great principle of the paramount importance of love.

But why does he choose these particular illustrations to make his point?

Because these were the particular problems facing the church in Corinth at the time.

It's evident from chapter 14 that there were problems in Corinth with their use of gifts like speaking in tongues and prophecy which are the two gifts he mentions first here.

So as we later consider Paul's encouragement in 14:26 for all to participate by bringing a contribution to our meetings, we need to remember that whatever we may bring must be brought in love.

The nature of love (4-8)

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

These verses have a far wider application than our understanding of chapter 14. But in the context, chapter 13 is set right in the middle of Paul's teaching in chapters 12 and 14. Notice the development of thought in these chapters:

12: The importance of the role of every Christian within the church as the body of Christ

13: The importance of LOVE

14: Specific direction on how this should work in our meetings.

Maybe we could summarise verses 4-7 as putting other people first.

As we will see when we come to look at chapter 14 in more detail, this is the underlying principle of all he says which is surely the main way in which we express our love for them. Prophecy, for example, is to be desired more than tongues because it edifies others, not just ourselves (14:1-5).

Think about how we can apply putting other people first to what we say and do in our meetings.

Recognising our limitations (8-12)

8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

What can we learn from this?

Although there will ultimately be no need for supernatural gifts, love will remain for ever. It never fails (8). It remains (13).
Wonderful though gifts like tongues and prophecy are, their operation is not infallible. We know in part and we prophesy in part. What Paul is encouraging in 14:26 must be understood in this light. God's gifts are perfect, but we are not. We do not yet see face to face. The gifts come from God, but they come through us, and we are fallible.

That's why words of prophecy need to be weighed carefully (29) and why Paul found it necessary to give instruction as to how the gifts should be used. Had the operation of the gifts been infallible, such instruction would have been unnecessary.

But that's something we will consider in more detail later in the series.

Next time we'll start on Chapter 14 and will be looking at The Right Use of Speaking in Tongues.

So, that's it from me for today. Thanks for listening.

Now, some questions for discussion. Group leaders, over to you.

Questions for discussion

How important are the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit in the context of our small group? Do we make room for them? Have we all received the baptism in the Spirit?
What practical application does Paul's teaching that every part of the body is needed and to be valued equally make to what happens in our group and in church?
How might Paul's teaching on love (especially 13:4-7) affect our attitude as individuals in our group meetings and in church?

Hint: Key phrases could be: Love is patient…Love is kind… it is not rude…Love does not boast…It is not proud… It does not envy …Love is not self-seeking… Love rejoices with the truth… It always protects.

View Details

NT GUIDELINES FOR SMALL GROUP MEETINGS – INTRODUCTION

Welcome back to Great Bible Truths with Dr David Petts. If you've been a regular listener to my podcasts, you may have been wondering what's been happening since January, when I finished my series where I was reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life.

Well, for first few months of the year I was working on turning the contents of those podcasts into a new book and preparing it for publication. The good news is that it's now available from my website and I've given it the title:

All the Days of My Life – a Story of God's Unfailing Love.

I'm already receiving many encouraging reports from those who have read it, and if you'd like a copy, full details are on my website.

Since then, I've been working on six podcasts for use in our church home-groups and have now decided to make them more widely available as a new series. You may remember a series I did in 2023 under the heading When You Come Together. I later turned that into a book with the same title. The podcasts I have now produced are based on some of the teaching in that book, which is itself based on Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 14 – especially verse 26.

This new series of talks is specially designed for use in small groups such as home groups. It contains six talks of less than 20 minutes each. We look particularly at 1 Corinthians 14 to see what God had to say about how Christians back then should 'do church', and seeing how this might affect what we do today, particularly in small groups.

As usual, the full text of each talk will appear on my website along with the recording. This should be helpful particularly to group leaders, who would also benefit from my book When you Come Together – God's Plans for when His People Meet (WYCT), which could be useful background reading, as also could Body Builders – gifts to make God's people grow (on the subject of spiritual gifts).

The first talk in the series will be posted at the same time as this, and the rest will follow shortly. To help you prepare for that, I'm making a few suggestions. But first let me say that it's not my intention that the notes and podcasts should be slavishly followed. They're just there to help you and your group to discuss and pray about what God's word might be saying about what should be happening in your meetings.

Things to do ahead of the group meeting – seven suggestions

Make space in your diary to prepare for the meeting.
Read the relevant scripture passages. See the list below.
Listen to the podcast and study the notes.
Encourage group members to listen ahead of time too.
Plan the format of your meeting and ensure that the podcast is played towards the beginning of the meeting to leave time for discussion and prayer afterwards.
Think about the discussion questions I have included at the end of the talk. (N.B. You'll find these in the notes. They're NOT in the recording).

Consider if you will have time to discuss all of them. If not, which are the most relevant to your group?

Pray for the leading of the Spirit when the group gathers.

Finally, here's a list of relevant background reading for each talk. You might like to keep a copy of this for future reference. Obviously, the Bible passages are the most important. For your guidance, WYCT contains a bit more than the notes, and Body Builders even more. But how much background reading you do is up to you.

RELEVANT EXTRA READING

1 CORINTHIANS WYCT BODY BUILDERS

Talk 1 12-13 Chs. 1, 3, 4

Talk 2 14 Ch. 5 Pages 131-140

Talk 3 14 Ch. 6 Pages 141-151

Talk 4 14 Ch. 7 Chapters 3 and 9

Talk 5 12-14 Ch. 8

Talk 6 14 Ch. 9

God bless you and grant you much blessing in your group meetings.

View Details

My Story Talk 35 Hope for the Future

Throughout this series I have tried to show how, in the words of another David, God's goodness and mercy have followed me all the days of my life (Psalm 23:6). Of course, to give an account of every single day would be completely impossible, not least because my life is not over yet!

So this, the fiinal talk in this series, will not be the end of my story. That's in the hands of the One who has loved and pardoned me, protected and provided for me, and who will guide my steps until his purpose for my life is finally accomplished. So I'll conclude my story with:

a reminder of God's past blessings

a record of my most recent activities, and

my reason for hope for the future.

A reminder of God's past blessings

First, I'm so grateful for Christian parents who prayed for me before I was born, brought me up to believe in Jesus, taught me the way of salvation, encouraged me to believe that God answers prayer and that nothing is impossible with him. They showed me how much they loved me and taught me that God loves me too. So even through the terrible years of World War 2, I always felt loved and protected.

I'm thankful, too, for the good teaching I received at Sunday School and Church and that I was educated at a time when the truths of the Christian faith were still widely accepted in our society, so that there was little conflict between what I learnt at school and what I was taught at home and at church. And that, when there was a difference of emphasis, my father was always able to give me an intelligent answer and show me why the Christian message made sense.

As I have already mentioned, it was clear from my earliest years that I was academically gifted, and I'm grateful for the good education I received at Brentwood School which led by God's grace to my gaining admission to Oxford University. A hymn we often used to sing at Elm Pak Baptist was Take my life and let it be consecrated, Lord, to thee… and I remember feeling strongly about the verse where it says, Take my intellect and use every power as though shalt choose. For as long as I can remember I have always wanted to use whatever abilities God has given me to spread the good news about Jesus.

But I was soon to learn that intellectual ability is not enough. Our battle is not primarily intellectual but spiritual, and when I first heard about the baptism in the Holy Spirit I was eager to receive. I'm so grateful for Laurie Dixon who shared his testimony with me, for Harold Young who laid hands on me when I first spoke in tongues, and for Pentecostal pastors like Alfred Webb and Richard Bolt who taught me so much about the things of the Spirit.

In those early years I was also greatly influenced by the writings of some of the pioneers of the Pentecostal Movement, notably Harold Horton, Donald Gee, and Willie Burton. Much of my thinking on the baptism and gifts of the Holy Spirit has been founded on their teaching and I thank God for such men of God who were willing to break free from the cessationist traditions of their forebears to pursue the all the fulness of life in the Spirit.

My experience at Oxford is a source of many happy memories. Coming only four weeks after I was baptised in the Spirit, my studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics were, I confess, of relatively little importance to me. I was more interested in telling others about my Christian experience, witnessing about Christ to unbelievers and about the Holy Spirit to those who were already Christians. Of particular importance were the prayer meetings we held which led to the formation of the Students' Pentecostal Fellowship and which were, by the grace of God, part of the beginnings of the Charismatic Renewal.

The years we spent in pastoral work, both at Colchester and Basingstoke led not only to the considerable growth of both those churches with souls being saved, bodies healed, and believers filled with the Holy Spirit, but also to a deeper understanding of the Word, a wider ministry beyond the local church, and a growing recognition within the Pentecostal Movement of the teaching gift the Lord had given me. For this I am truly thankful.

Despite the rocky road to Mattersey which I described in an earlier talk, the 27 years we spent there were possibly the most productive period of my life. Life was not without its problems, but I thank God for every minute of it. The privilege of training hundreds of future church leaders and the joy of seeing the fruits of their ministry more than made up for the difficulties we faced.

And the founding of EPTA led to an international ministry of Bible College teaching was an unexpected privilege which I could never have dreamed of when I felt God's call to ministry at the age of sixteen. The opportunity to share with so many students the importance of the baptism in the Spirit and spiritual gifts, illustrated by personal experience that was firmly rooted in biblical truth, and to present a balanced understanding of God's promises of healing were and still are sources of great joy and personal satisfaction.

I'm even grateful today for the difficulties we faced only some of which I have outlined in this book. Of course, at the time we would have preferred not to have them, but as I look back I have no doubt that the Lord had a purpose in it all. That does not mean that I know precisely what that purpose was, but because I believe in an all-powerful God who loves me and gave himself for me, I have learnt that problems produce patience and ultimately deepen our faith. And it is by faith and patience that we inherit his promises.

Which brings me to Eileen, my faithful wife, who devoted her life, first to serving Jesus, and then to serving his purpose for me as we journeyed through life together. The concluding words of the tribute to her that I wrote for her farewell service express well how I still feel:

Although I am missing her already, I am full of joy, knowing that she is now where she wanted to be. Until we meet again in Heaven, I will remember her for her love, her faithfulness, her devotion, her patience, her sense of humour, her impact on our children's lives, her smile, her perseverance in suffering, her courage in face of adversity, and above all, her childlike trust in Jesus and her total commitment to him. I thank God for the precious gift of Eileen and the privilege of being her husband for sixty-two years. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.

Eileen went to be with the Lord on 28th February 2024 and, although I still miss her every day, her departure to Heaven has meant that I am now free to resume some of the activities that were curtailed by the severe stroke she had in 2016. Which brings me to a brief statement of my most recent activities taken from my Christmas newsletter 2025.

A record of my most recent activities

A year ago, I was brought back onto the Leadership Team of our church and have been preaching and leading regularly every month. I have also been able to accept invitations to minister and attend at churches and conferences further afield. Here's a quick summary:

o January – 2 days' teaching at Light and Life conference

o March – was privileged to pay a tribute at Keith Monument's funeral in Nottingham

o June – a weekend preaching at Walthamstow (when I also took the opportunity to visit Eileen's sister, Joan, and her husband, David)

o July – participated in the EPTA conference held in Malvern at Regent's Theological College

o September – attended the wedding of Jotham (grandson) and Chesca in Brighton

o October – a weekend's preaching in Leyland followed by the Ocean Wings Conference in Llandudno where I was one of the speakers

o November – attended Sarah's Graduation (MA in Applied Theology with Distinction) at Moorlands College and Christchurch Priory. So proud of all my wonderful children!

o December – participated in the Charismatic and Pentecostal Leaders' Gathering in Northamptonshire

As most of these activities involved long journeys, I was grateful for the comfort of my E-Class Mercedes, acquired earlier this year. I'm also grateful for the health and strength God gives me to do all this, although I confess I do get more tired than I used to! However, I do manage to swim 500 metres about twice a week. This has helped me lose a couple of stones in weight.

Finally, I'm still writing and doing regular podcasts. All this year I've been writing my memoirs and am almost finished. Let me know if you'd like a copy.

So, have a wonderful Christmas and may the Lord bless you and use you in the coming year.

So thankful for Jesus – for all he has done and continues to do for us.

With much love

David

My reason for hope for the future

At the time of recording this I will be 87 years old in a few days' time. When she was in her eighties, referring to some of her aches and pains my mother used to say, Oh David, don't get old, to which I would reply, Why? You don't want me to die young, do you?! She knew of course that I was joking, and I, of course, fully understand what she was saying. Humanly speaking there isn't much to look forward to when you're old. So, what reasons do we have for hope for the future?

As I conclude the story of my life so far, let me give you three reasons:

My past experience of God's goodness

My present observation of what he is doing

My understanding of what the Bible says about our future.

I shall say little about the first of these as all that have written so far has been a record of how God's goodness and mercy have followed me all the days of my life. Now it's enough to summarise all this by saying that God's goodness to me in the past informs my belief for the future.

The God who has loved me, saved me, protected me, and provided for me throughout my life will not fail me now.

My second reason for hope is my observation of what God is doing right now. I see this particularly in the lives of my children and grandchildren. Debbie, Sarah, and Jonathan are all faithfully serving the Lord and using the many gifts and talents God has given them. And the same is true of most of my grandchildren, four of whom are either recently, or soon about to be, married to wonderful Christian partners. I see in them the same passion to serve the Lord Jesus as Eileen and I have carried down through the years and know that this will continue when I am gone.

But of course, what God is doing is far wider than just our family. There is a fresh expectation in the hearts of God's people as we see an increasing openness to the gospel among those we meet. The tide is beginning to turn. The apathy and antagonism that have for so long been prevalent in our society are being replaced, particularly among young people, by a genuine interest and desire to know more. Yes, we have every reason to hope.

And finally, and most important of all, I have hope because of what the Bible says. One of my favourite verses is Romans 15:13, where Paul says:

May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Paul's prayer is that we should overflow with hope. Not just have hope, or even be filled with hope, but overflow. God wants us to have so much hope that it overflows to others!

But how can we overflow with hope? The surrounding verses show us four main things. Two of these are found in verse 4:

For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

The first secret to having hope is endurance. However difficult our situation we must press on. One thing's for sure – if we give up, there is no hope. As Pastor Stan Hyde used to encourage us, we must keep on keeping on.

But God has not left us to ourselves on this. He enables us to keep on hoping through the encouragement of the Scriptures. This happens in two ways. First, the Bible is full of examples of men and women who, like the heroes mentioned in Hebrews 11, endured despite great difficulty. And secondly, it gives us great promises and assurance of God's love – see the last few verses of Romans 8 for example.

But it's not just the examples and promises in the Bible that give us hope. As we have already seen, we can overflow with the hope through the power of the Holy Spirit (v 13). A few verses later Paul goes on to connect the power of the Spirit with the power of signs and wonders (v19). Miracles give us hope. Nothing is impossible with God. Whatever our situation, God has the answer, and it may well be miraculous. But the power of the Spirit is not limited to miracles. It's manifested in fruit as well as gifts (Galatians 5:22-23). Sometimes God does not deliver us from our troubles, he delivers us in them.

He fills us with joy and peace as we trust in him (v13 again). And in doing so he gives us hope.

So the final key to overflowing with hope is trusting in the God of hope. We simply have to trust him. That his promises will be fulfilled. That he will bring us through. That he will perfect that which concerns us. And we can do that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures and having confidence in the power of the Holy Spirit.

But what are we hoping for? Our ultimate hope is found in verse 12 where Paul quotes the prophet Isaiah:

The Root of Jesse will spring up, One who will arise to rule over the nations; the Gentiles will hope in him

We are waiting for the One who is to rule over the nations! We are waiting for that blessed hope – the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ (Titus 2:13). Why do I have hope? Because Jesus is coming again! Every eye shall see him. Every knee shall bow before him. Every tongue will confess that he is Lord. He is coming to reign. He is coming to judge. He is coming to make all things new. He is coming to take us to be with him forever. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain. We will be like him because we shall see him! Glorious hope! All other hopes pale into insignificance.

I'm so grateful that God's goodness and mercy have followed me all the days of my life and

I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever.

Will you?

View Details

My Story Talk 34 Overcoming New Challenges

Welcome to Talk 34 in our series where I'm reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I was mentioning some of the health challenges I faced in India and today I will be describing how these continued for some time once we were back in England. I will also be talking about the serious health challenges Eileen faced during the last ten years of her life. I take no pleasure in recording all this, but an honest account of my life must include the hard times as well as the good, and, of course, the Lord has brought me through.

Challenges following India

Fortunately, there was little in my diary for the first few weeks after our return from India and I soon began to feel better. I thought I was back to normal and in April we set off for two weekends of ministry in Essex. We would stay with Eileen's sister Joan in Billericay and the first weekend I would preach in Witham and a week later in our old church in Colchester.

On the first Saturday we drove from our home in Paignton straight to Witham, a journey of about 250 miles, and I preached in the afternoon and evening meetings. We then made our way to Billericay, returning to Witham for the Sunday morning service. I had felt fine on the Saturday, but on Sunday I suddenly started to feel unwell again shortly before I was due to preach.

The symptoms were like those I had had in India, and I went outside to get some fresh air. However, I managed to get through the preaching but was grateful to get back to Billericay. The next day Joan arranged an appointment for me with her GP who, hearing that I had been bitten by a mosquito in India and suspecting that I might have malaria, sent me for tests at the hospital in Basildon.

Although these tested negative, I was still worried that there was something seriously wrong with me and just wanted to get back home to Paignton. Apologising profusely, I asked our friends at Colchester to release me from my commitment to preach the following weekend and we drove home later that week, unsure of what the future might hold.

The next two years proved to be extremely difficult. I continued to experience similar problems every time I preached. In May 2010 I drove up to Huddersfield for the AoG conference but was so stressed that I returned home without attending a meeting. I immediately arranged an appointment with my GP, Mark Thompson, a good Christian man, and told him my whole story. He reminded me that as Christians we are not immune to such things and recommended some books that might help explain my condition.

It appears that my experience in India, caused by extreme heat, dehydration, and overwork, triggered a rush of adrenalin which produced the symptoms I was struggling with. I learnt that worrying about the symptoms only made matters worse because that causes a further rush of adrenalin. I was caught in a vicious circle, and the only way out was to embrace the symptoms, tell myself that they would not harm me, and gradually I would get better.

And that's what happened, although it did take a long time. Following my visit to the doctor I cancelled my two-week trip to teach at the Bible College in Finland in May. We did go to Madeira for a three week holiday in June, but this turned out to be disappointing because of my recurring symptoms. However, in September I did manage to teach for two weeks at Mattersey, preach for a weekend in Pocklington, and assisted by Bob Hyde, teach a course at CTS in Brussels for a week. I was still experiencing the symptoms but managing to cope with them – at least most of the time. But there were still occasions when I felt unable to preach. In October I cancelled a weekend in Poynton and in November I was unable to complete a weekend's ministry in Aston. I began to wonder if the time had come for me to give up.

But less than two weeks later the Lord suddenly intervened. Eileen and I were in Exeter at a meeting for Assemblies of God ministers and their wives. The guest preacher was John Glass, the General Superintendent of the Elim Churches. He was preaching on Jeremiah 1 when he came to verses 11-12:

The word of the LORD came to me: "What do you see, Jeremiah?" "I see the branch of an almond tree," I replied. The LORD said to me, "You have seen correctly, for I am watching to see that my word is fulfilled."

He explained the play on words that we find in these verses – the Hebrew word for almond is very similar to the word for watch. The almond tree is among the first to blossom in spring. It's something you watch for as a sign that spring has come. Winter will be followed by spring because God watches over his word to see that it is fulfilled.

Now in England most of us don't see an almond tree too often, so John likened it to crocuses. In his garden they're the first flowers to bloom in spring. They're the sign or guarantee that winter won't be forever. Then John broke away from his notes and said something like this:

There are some of you here who are feeling that your ministry has come to an end. You have been experiencing a bleak winter, but the Lord wants you to know that it will not be forever. You will experience a new springtime.

Eileen and I looked at each other. Was this for us? Surely it must be. But there were a lot of other people in that meeting. Could it be that John's prophetic word was for them and not for us? We drove home after the meeting hoping, rather than believing, that this really was a word from the Lord for us.

And then, that evening, Jill Cooper, one of our friends from church, arrived on our doorstep and said,

I've brought you a little present. To be honest, I had bought it for someone else, but then I felt the Lord tell me to give it to you instead.

What was the present? A bowl of crocuses! How good God is! He gave us the assurance that I would emerge from this dark period of winter into a new springtime of ministry. We sometimes have to go through a valley of shadow, but he is with us in it all the way.

So in 2011, whenever the symptoms reoccurred, I pressed through them, knowing that this condition wouldn't last forever. In March I flew to Scotland to speak to the AoG ministers, in May we went back to Finland to teach at Iso Kirja for two weeks, in September I taught for two weeks at Mattersey, and in October I was back at CTS again. None of these occasions was easy. In fact, I often felt really unwell, but everyone always said that, if I hadn't told them, they would not have known anything was wrong with me!

I'm not quite sure how much longer it took to get back to normal. In fact, I'm not really sure what 'normal' is! We all deteriorate physically as we get older and our energy levels are not what they were. When I look back at what I was doing in the years before Mattersey and throughout my time there, I wonder now how I possibly managed it all. What was normal for me then is far beyond my capabilities now, but I have moved into a new springtime in my ministry and people tell me that at 87 I'm not doing badly for my age, for which I am grateful.

Challenges to Eileen's health

But my health challenges were nothing compared with those faced by Eileen in the last ten years of her life. On Sunday 21st December 2014 quite unexpectedly at about 9am Eileen started to experience severe pain in her stomach as she was getting ready for church. As the pain was unrelenting, causing Eileen to pass out a couple of times, by 3pm I decided I needed to call 999. I accompanied Eileen in the ambulance while Jonathan followed by car. After waiting with her a few hours, Jon and I were advised to go home and await the results of an MRI scan.

At about 10.30 that evening the surgeon phoned to ask us to go in to discuss options for Eileen. It was clear that the situation was very serious. On arrival at the hospital, we were told that the scan had revealed that the blood supply had been cut off from Eileen's bowel and that her smaller bowel had died. Without an immediate operation she would die.

There was even the possibility that the condition was already too far advanced for them to be able to save her. Furthermore, even if they were able to save her, there was a strong possibility that she would need to have a permanent colostomy. Eileen agreed with us that we should agree to the operation and trust God for the best possible outcome.

We prayed with her, of course, but as you can imagine, for the next few hours we were on an emotional roller-coaster, experiencing all the ups and downs from fear to faith, but with a determination to trust God, come what may. We simply could not believe that it was God's time for Eileen to go to Heaven and kept praying that he would spare her.

Imagine our relief when at one o'clock on Monday morning the surgeon phoned to say that she had the best possible news for us. Eileen's bowel was alive! What had been causing the pain was an internal hernia which they had been able to fix. None of her bowel had needed to be removed and the blood supply had been restored.

Now bearing in mind the certainty with which the surgeon told us that Eileen's bowel had died we were convinced that this was not just a case of faulty diagnosis, but that God had worked an amazing miracle in restoring Eileen's bowel to life. God had allowed man to do what he could but intervened to do what man could not do – restore a dead bowel to life!

We were so grateful for the prayers of the many people who interceded for Eileen throughout this difficult time and to God for his miraculous intervention. I never cease to be amazed at his wonderful grace and goodness to us. But the operation had been very invasive and left Eileen severely weakened for months. And she never fully regained the strength and energy she had lost, but that, of course, may have been partly caused by the fact that she was not getting any younger.

And neither was I! In April 2015 we had a few days' break in the Lake District and neither of us felt like walking very far. It was much the same in September when we went to the Isle of Wight, but on both these holidays we contented ourselves with driving around in the car, visiting old haunts, marvelling at the beauty of God's creation, and, of course, enjoying the food.

We planned two short holidays for 2016, the first in Longtown, a village in Herefordshire close to the Welsh border in May. After preaching in Rugby on the Sunday morning, we drove there in the afternoon and spent a few delightful days in a charming cottage on the banks of the River Monnow, returning to Brixham the following weekend. The second holiday, planned for a week in September at the southern end of Coniston Water, never happened.

In June I flew to Ireland to preach for a weekend in Sligo where Daniel Caldwell, one of our former students, was leading a church. On Sunday morning I preached on Jesus calming the storm in Matthew 8 and I remember saying that sometimes unexpected problems suddenly arise in our lives, but Jesus is well able to see us through them and get us to the other side. Who knows what might happen this week? But whatever happens Jesus is with us. And I flew home that afternoon.

I have preached that message many times, but little did I know what was to happen just two days later. On Tuesday evening, sitting in her armchair Eileen had a severe stroke and was rushed into Torbay Hospital. From head to toe she had no feeling down the right side of her body. The next Sunday, still in hospital, she suffered another stroke and we were told that the outlook was extremely bleak. She was rushed to Derriford Hospital in Plymouth and underwent surgery to relieve the pressure on her brain. Her life had been saved.

After eleven days she was transferred back to Torbay where she remained for eight days until a bed was available at Newton Abbot where she began a course of rehab. Throughout this time we were all looking to the Lord for a complete healing, whether instantaneous or gradual, but her progress was extremely slow, and it was becoming increasingly clear that she needed a miracle if she would ever walk again.

And although the healing miracle we were praying for never happened, we could see the hand of the Lord at work in other ways. Firstly, on July 28th when we were sitting in the hospital day room and eating cake to celebrate our wedding anniversary, the Torbay doctor who had told us that the outlook was extremely bleak approached us and said, I'm looking for Eileen Petts. And when he saw her he said, I can't believe it. Which was something he repeated more than once during the fifteen minutes he was with us. He clearly had not expected Eileen to survive, and this encouraged our faith that God was at work in the situation.

On 10th August, after eight weeks in three different hospitals, Eileen finally came home. And that, in itself, was a miracle. We had been told just a few days earlier that Eileen would have to be discharged as her bed was needed for someone else. To continue her rehab she could either go into a care home if we could find one that would take her, or the NHS would provide rehab workers to come to our home, but we would need to find a home care company to take care of Eileen's other needs. The problem was that at the time there were over 70 people in Torbay on a waiting list! I needed an answer – quick!

And just in time the answer came. Just a day before Eileen had to be discharged, Trude Hyde came to me and said that she and her twin sister Sylvia would take care of Eileen if we would like them to. How wonderful! I didn't need to ask Eileen because I knew she would love it, but for the sake of all concerned, I felt I needed to ask the Lord for his guidance. And I did foresee one possible problem. I didn't know if I would be allowed to choose Eileen's carers or if they would require certain recognised medical qualifications.

I needed an immediate answer to that question, and I didn't know where to find it. I was just going off to visit Eileen, and I didn't want to mention the twins' kind offer until I knew the answer in case it led to her being disappointed. And then I remembered that Katie, the daughter of our next-door neighbour, Sue, was the lead carer for the whole of Torbay. She would certainly know the answer. I was just about to go and knock on Sue's door when I changed my mind and said,

Lord, if this is of you, before I get into the car, please let Sue come out without me knocking on her door.

And that's what happened. No sooner had I prayed that prayer than Sue came out of her house. In less than five minutes Katie was on the phone and told me that I could choose whom I liked. Eileen was overjoyed, and Trude and Sylvia took care of her visiting our home four times a day for the next four years until we moved to a bungalow on the other side of town, when workers from Abide Care, Brixham, took over.

Eileen finally went to be with the Lord in February 2024 almost eight years after that awful stroke. She was always grateful that her condition was not physically painful, but frustrated at her inability to walk and do all those things we normally take for granted. And we both naturally wondered why the Lord had allowed this to happen. One Bible passage that Eileen found particularly helpful was 2 Corinthians 1:3-5 where Paul says:

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. For just as the sufferings of Christ flow over into our lives, so also through Christ our comfort overflows.

And the comfort and strength our Father gave to Eileen certainly did overflow to others, not least as a testimony to the dozens of carers from Abide who came into our home over the final four years of her life. Throughout this whole very difficult period both Eileen and I had been sustained by our Christian faith and by a particular word received from the Lord through Barrie Taylor, our daughter Sarah's father-in-law.

Barrie and Sandra live some distance away and we normally only saw them once or twice a year. On one such occasion when Eileen seemed to be making little progress after her stroke we were all having a meal together at Berry Head Hotel, when Barrie said the Lord had given him a word for us:

My Father is at work in your lives and situation which He is using as a platform to display his sustaining grace.

God sometimes uses amazing miracles of healing to display his power and love, but it is often the sustaining grace that he gives his people in times of suffering that brings others to faith. Through Eileen's suffering the lives of many were touched, people who might never have otherwise heard the good news about Jesus. And since she died there have been many opportunities to share the gospel. The funeral staff at the crematorium were visibly moved and said they had never experienced a service like it and neighbours said the same thing about the church service that followed it.

As Christians we know where we are going, and the knowledge that our loved ones are with the Lord is a source of great comfort and even joy. Although I still miss her every day, I sometimes weep for joy at the thought of how happy Eileen must now be in Heaven! And one day we shall meet again! But until then there is still work for me to do down here. But that's the subject of our final talk.

View Details

My Story Talk 33 Life after Mattersey (3)

India

Our last trip beyond Europe during the years following our departure from Mattersey was to India in 2010. Like my first trip to Ethiopia in 2005, this came about through Arto Hamalainen, the Overseas Missions Director for the Pentecostal churches in Finland. One of their missionaries had asked him to recommend someone who would come and teach about the Holy Spirit and Arto suggested me. The Finns said that they would cover my airfare and, as Eileen had never visited India, I was happy to pay for her.

Our destination was Machilipatnam on the eastern coast of India, stopping briefly to minister at Mumbai before flying home. However, as several of our former Mattersey students were from India, we decided that we'd like to visit them as well, if at all possible. So I contacted Lawrence Arumanayagam in Coimbatore and Victor Palla in Palakonda and they were keen to have us come.

So an itinerary was arranged for us to arrive at each place on a Monday and then stay for six days before moving on the following Sunday evening or Monday. I made it clear that it was important for me to abide by the Sabbath principle of resting one day in seven. Apart from that, they could arrange as much ministry as they liked during our stay with them.

However, it turned out that they were all so keen to make the most of our visit that they organised ministry for all six days and counted on us travelling on to the next place on the day we were supposed to be resting! So the itinerary turned out as follows:

Friday 19th February – travel to London Heathrow

Saturday 20th – depart Heathrow

Sunday 21st – arrive Mumbai at 1a.m. (local time) – attend church in Mumbai and preach in the evening

Monday 22nd – fly to Machilipatnam

Tuesday to Sunday – ministry in Machilipatnam

Sunday 28th – evening, fly to Hyderabad (staying overnight at the airport)

Monday March 1st – travel on to Palakonda

Tuesday to Sunday – ministry in Palakonda

Monday 8th – travel to Coimbatore via Chennai and Bangalore

Tuesday to Sunday – ministry in Coimbatore

Monday 15th – travel on to Mumbai

Tuesday-Wednesday – ministry in Mumbai

Thursday 18th March – fly home.

I have taken space to include this itinerary to show how busy our schedule was and to indicate what was probably the reason for the health challenges I subsequently faced and which I will describe later. But first let me briefly mention some of the highlights of the trip.

Machilipatnam

Although we were already tired from our long journey to Mumbai we needed to be up by 4.50 on Monday morning to catch the 6.50 flight to Bangalore where we changed planes and flew on to Vijayawada where we were met by Pauli, our Finnish host. We were so grateful for the comfortable taxi he had hired to take us on to Machilipatnam.

Pauli and his wife accommodated us throughout our stay in a comfortable room in their home and fed us well. From Tuesday to Friday I was teaching every morning and afternoon and developed a sore throat, partly due, I suspect, to the dry heat. However, on the Saturday there was no meeting until the evening, and we were taken to visit some of the local villages and a vast beach where people were in the sea dressed in their everyday clothes. This was a very poor area which had been badly affected by the Tsunami a few years earlier. We were also interested to visit the Hyny Bible College, named after the first missionary from Finland, 'Mother' Hyny.

Once again I am grateful to Eileen's journal which brings back happy memories of the Sunday morning meeting:

For the first half of church children from orphanages sit on the floor. They come for Sunday School and then stay for the meeting. They are so still and well behaved. They have Bibles and some take notes. They gave us garlands again…

After a quick lunch we were back in a taxi again speeding our way to Vijayawada airport. Our stay had been brief and very busy, but despite our tiredness we were grateful for the opportunity the Lord had given us to visit these wonderful people and to share his word with them.

Palakonda

Palakonda is also on the east coast of India, but further north. The quickest way to get there was to fly inland to Hyderabad in central India and then northeast to Visakhapatnam. This would require an overnight stop at Hyderabad airport where fortunately a comfortable bedroom was available at a very reasonable price.

At Visakhapatnam we were greeted by Victor Palla and one of his associate pastors. Victor was one of our former students having taken both our undergraduate and MA courses. He knew Bob Hyde well as they had both been at Mattersey together and our church in Brixham was supporting Victor and the thirty churches he had planted in the Palakonda area after leaving college.

The taxi journey on to Palakonda took a further three hours and we were grateful for the large ensuite airconditioned bedroom Victor and Lydia provided for us throughout our stay. The hospitality was lavish and the food both plentiful and excellent. It's so difficult not to eat too much when people are so generous.

There was only one problem. Palakonda is famous for its malaria carrying mosquitos and both of us were bitten while we were there despite Victor's efforts to zap the invaders with an amazing racquet powered by batteries that electrocuted them. However, thanks to prayer and the antimalarial tablets we were taking, neither of us contracted the dreaded disease.

During the course of the week we ministered in numerous meetings in Palakonda and the surrounding villages. In one of them we were told how the church had started with a family becoming Christians. The rest of the villagers worshipped a tree. The Christian family wanted to cut it down but were afraid of the people. Then Christians from another village came and after praying cut the tree down. The villagers expected something bad to happen to these Christians, but when nothing of the kind happened, they all became Christians.

But the highlight of our visit was undoubtedly the day we left at 10am for a meeting with ten churches in the beautiful hills surrounding Palakonda. We travelled by Jeep on extremely bumpy roads at an average speed of 10mph passing through villages that hadn't changed for centuries. We finally arrived at a village where a large banner with our names on it welcomed us.

Leaving the Jeep there we were led up a rocky, dusty path to the church where some 400 people were sitting outside it on the ground under a leafy shelter. We sat on chairs with our backs to the church building and the girls came and washed Eileen's feet and we were both given beautiful garlands to wear. The meeting started with lots of singing followed by prayer, after which I preached. This was followed by a meal where the people sat in rows on the ground and were served with a rice dish on disposable plates made from sown leaves. In her journal Eileen commented:

The whole time was special. Amazing atmosphere.

And the same day, after returning to Palakonda for a short rest, we were driven to a village after dark where 200 had gathered for another meeting where, after a firework display, I was asked to preach again. We returned to Palakonda extremely tired, but very happy. It was very much the same the entire week and by the time we moved on to Coimbatore I was beginning to feel the need of a good rest.

But what a privilege it had been to have fellowship with Victor and Lydia and to share the word of God with so many wonderful people in the Palakonda area whose way of life is very different from ours but with whom we have so much in common.

Coimbatore

After a busy week in Palakonda, the following Monday we flew on to Coimbatore via Chennai (formerly Madras) to be greeted by Lawrence and Getzi Arumanayagam and were made very welcome in their lovely modern apartment. On the Tuesday we were straight into teaching sessions both morning and afternoon in their beautiful church. I was pleased to see that the congregation was much larger than it had been when I had visited them in 1986.

The teaching sessions continued on the Wednesday. They started well until something happened that I had never experienced before. In the middle of preaching I suddenly began to feel unwell. Eileen, who was sitting on the front row, said afterwards that she thought I was going to have a stroke or a heart attack. I asked if I could sit down for a moment and the people, suspecting that I was suffering from dehydration, kindly brought me some fluids and chocolate.

After a few minutes I was feeling a bit better and was able to resume preaching although I remained seated to do so. Looking back on it, I'm sure that it was because of overwork and the extreme heat. I hadn't had a rest day since we left England and India was even hotter than usual that year. But the experience had seriously affected my confidence.

The next day, realising that I needed a rest, Lawrence and Getzi decided to take us for an overnight stay in Ooty where the temperature is a few degrees lower because of its altitude. Eileen said it felt almost cold at times, but I was so grateful for it. We had a delightful two days there and I began to feel better.

We took the opportunity to visit the Livsey Children's Home built in memory of Helga Mosey. Helga had come to our youth camp in the New Forest back in the seventies and was one of the passengers on Pan Am flight 103 destroyed by a bomb while flying over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988. Her parents John and Lisa were well known to us, and the home had been built from part of the proceeds of the compensation they had received.

The trip to Ooty did us good and I thought that I had got over whatever it was that had caused the problem on Wednesday. However, on Saturday morning I was feeling so unwell that I was unable to attend a graduation service where I was expected to preach. Instead, Lawrence phoned a Christian doctor at the hospital who arranged an immediate appointment for me. They took my blood pressure and gave me an ECG and some tablets for vertigo, but could find nothing wrong with me.

Encouraged by the news, on Sunday I was feeling somewhat better and managed to preach three times, at 6.30am in Zion Church where Lawrence's father was the pastor, at 9.30am in Bethel City Cathedral led by Pastor David Prakasam, another of our former students, and again in the afternoon at the students' graduation where Eileen and I presented their certificates.

Mumbai

On Monday we flew back to Mumbai where the temperature was five degrees hotter than usual. Our hosts were Yukka and Lily, Finnish missionaries who, hearing that I was to visit India, had asked if we could fit in a couple of days of seminars before we returned to England. We were accommodated in a comfortable hotel room, but once again I began to feel unwell and ate very little breakfast. I was beginning to feel I just wanted to get home to England, but the flight wasn't until Thursday.

However, when Biju Thampi, another of our former Mattersey students, called me and asked if he and his wife, Secu, could take us to lunch, we were keen to see him and we agreed to go. They arrived at 12 and before lunch took us to see a little of what they were doing for some of the many homeless children of the area. There were dozens of children on a piece of wasteland in the shadow of a viaduct where people regularly dumped their rubbish.

Biju's ministry involved sending buses to these children where they provide them with a meal and give them a basic education. He told us moving stories of how they had been able to help these children and of miracles that had happened among them, and we decided to hand over all our remaining rupees to him as a small contribution to this vital work.

By contrast, immediately afterwards they took us to a high-class hotel not far from the rubbish dump where we were treated to a delightful lunch. After what we had seen we almost felt guilty eating it. Our time with Biju and Secu had been all too brief, but as I was scheduled to teach in the afternoon, we had to say goodbye.

Yukka had hired the Catholic Centre and arranged seminars for us from 3.30 to 5.00, and 5.30-7.00 that day with two further sessions scheduled for the Wednesday starting at 9.30. People had travelled great distances to be there to hear me talk about the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately it was extremely hot and there was no air conditioning in the building and I soon began to feel unwell again.

Realising I had a problem, during the break Yukka arranged for me to sit in his car with its air conditioner on and I was able to continue teaching for the first part of the next session. But sadly I had to finish 30 minutes earlier than planned and they rushed me back to the hotel and sent for a doctor who told me that there was nothing seriously wrong with me and that it was all probably due to the heat.

Although that was reassuringly good to hear, it did not, of course, solve the immediate problem. The first session was at 9.30 and the temperature was no cooler and I was unable to complete the seminars. I apologised profusely and the people were very understanding despite their disappointment. They promised that if we ever came again they would be sure to hire an air-conditioned building.

The next day we flew back to England, disappointed that a wonderful trip had finished as it had but intensely relieved to be going home where, hopefully, I would soon be back to normal. But I was soon to discover that my recovery would take far longer than expected. There would be new challenges to face for both of us. But that will be the subject of our next talk.

View Details

My Story Talk 32 Life after Mattersey (2)

Welcome to Talk 32 in our series where I'm reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I was telling you how the Lord opened up a wider ministry for me after we left Mattersey and we concentrated on Countries in Europe. Today it will be Africa and Reunion Island.

African Countries

I have already mentioned my first trip to Africa which was to Burkina Faso in the year 2000 while we were still at Mattersey. The next trip was to South Africa in 2004, just after leaving Mattersey, which I have also mentioned already. The African countries I visited after Mattersey were Ethiopia (five times between 05 and 09), and Ghana, Nigeria, and South Africa again, making a total of ten trips overall, half of which were to Ethiopia..

I visited Ghana in 2007 at the invitation of Paul Frimpong Manso, then the Superintendent of the Ashanti Region and later to become the General Superintendent of Assemblies of God in Ghana. Paul had been a student at Mattersey in the nineties, being one of the first to earn our newly validated BA degree and had later returned to take our MA too.

The purpose of my visit was primarily to speak at their pastors' conference and preach at their ordination service for new ministers. I was treated like royalty despite the fact that they were all smartly dressed in suits and ties – and some even with clerical collars – while I wore a short sleeved open-necked shirt, a special concession granted to me as someone unaccustomed to the temperature which, although it was only January, was far too high for my liking – a problem I was to face later in India in 2010.

It was a privilege to see the great work that Paul was doing and to know that he valued highly the teaching he had received at Mattersey. One of the things he had said to his fellow-students about my teaching on the Holy Spirit was that in Ghana they not only believed the things I taught but that they also put them into practice! Miracles seem to happen more often in Africa than they do in Europe, but often there is a lack of sound biblical teaching to go with them. The truth is, we need both. And a major part of my ministry has been to emphasise this.

My visit to Nigeria in 08 was unique in that the invitation did not come from any of the usual sources. Barrie Taylor is my daughter Sarah's father-in-law and has exercised an ongoing ministry for many years visiting Nigeria and by regular visits has developed a strong relationship with some of the churches there. As a result they respectfully refer to him as Uncle Barrie.

Barrie invited me to accompany him on one of these trips and I was delighted to do so. We flew to Abuja, the capital of Nigeria, and were met by pastors John Sarota and Vitalis Yahemba, the CEO of Truth and Life Ministry. We travelled by car to Kaduna a journey of some 200 kilometres to the north of Abuja and stayed at the Catholic Social Centre sleeping in relatively comfortable rooms.

But I confess I was disturbed at times by the high-pitched buzz an occasional mosquito flapping its wings at 250 times a second and by the fear that one might find its way under the mosquito net. Another disturbance early each morning was the sound of the muezzin calling from the minaret of a local mosque reminding faithful Muslims to pray. Kaduna lies very close to the northern area of Nigeria which is predominantly Muslim and where so many Christians have lost their lives for their faith.

Despite the ever-present Muslim threat, Christians from the area gathered in large numbers, evidenced by the fact that while we were there the total attendance was around 2,500, meetings being held at Talmo College in a hall holding about 800 and the messages relayed to four marquees and translated into four different tribal languages. We both felt that the trip had been well worthwhile and I was particularly grateful for the opportunity to get to know Barrie better and to discover how much we both had in common.

I went to South Africa again in November 2009 at the request of Paul Alexander to teach at the Africa School of Missions which he had founded some time previously. I enjoyed teaching the small class of students and the fellowship at mealtimes with staff members too. However, there were long periods each day when I had little to do and, apart from a quick visit to the Kruger National Park, which I had visited with Eileen in 04, I needed to find something to do to occupy my time. So I decided the start writing a new book.

For some time I had been feeling that I should write something that would be useful as a tool in evangelism, and this was confirmed by something Brian Niblock said to me when he was preaching in our church in Brixham. And that's how I came to write my little book, Signs from Heaven – why I believe. To my surprise, the whole thing was finished by the time I left South Africa.

But perhaps the most significant moment about the whole trip was what happened on the flight home. I checked in online at the earliest possible moment and was able to get a seat at the front of economy where there was the most legroom. But after boarding the plane I was soon asked by a flight attendant if I would vacate my seat as someone had been taken ill and needed easy access to a seat on that row. So I ended up sitting in a different seat, but on the same row and, as it turned out, right next to the man who was unwell.

He was accompanied by his wife who explained to me that only a few days earlier they had flown to South Africa for a holiday but on arrival her husband had been rushed to hospital. His condition, the details of which I forget, was quite rare, totally unexpected, potentially fatal, and required specialist treatment. They were returning to England in a state of shock and understandably very worried.

They asked me what I had been doing in South Africa, and I said that among other things I had been writing a book about miracles. I said something like,

It sounds like you need a miracle right now.

It turned out that they were Catholics and, though they hadn't been to church for a long time, certainly did believe in miracles. I shared the gospel with them, prayed for them, gave them a copy of my book on healing, and posted them Signs from Heaven as soon as it was published. Years later she told me that her husband, who had made an unexpectedly quick recovery, had now died, but that that encounter on the plane had restored their faith in the Lord Jesus.

My first trip to Ethiopia was in January 2005 at the invitation of Heikki Pentinnen, a Finnish missionary who was organising an international charismatic conference in Addis Ababa and looking for a main speaker to take several sessions on the gifts of the Spirit. He had heard about me from Arto Hamalainan who knew me well through our work on the PEF presidium. Hundreds of leaders, including those from Orthodox and Coptic churches, gathered from across Ethiopia for this unique occasion and I was thrilled to see their desire to get a biblical grasp on the work of the Spirit.

I made annual visits for the next four years (2006-09) teaching for one or two weeks in a Bible College in Addis at the invitation of Canadian missionaries Jeremy and Teresa Feller with whom I usually stayed. Jeremy and Teresa's parents, Brian and Valerie Rutten, had all come to Mattersey to take our MA in Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies and were keen to have me come and teach in the college where they were serving with PAOC (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada).

On at least two of these occasions, I was accompanied by Eileen who loved the country and its wonderful people. Apart from the teaching in the college we were taken on lengthy trips to parts of the country which were far hotter than Addis where the climate is more acceptable because of its high altitude. One such trip in February 07 was to Awassa some 290 kilometres to the south. Eileen's journal captures the memory very well:

Lush vegetation, bananas, sugar cane. Beautiful. Lakes, mountains, animals, people, donkey carts. Small groups of huts. Camels, ostrich, hyena. A dead animal being eaten by a vulture and a dog watching and waiting, Young children herding animals, carrying heavy loads, water, bundles of leaves, sticks.

The Pentecostal Church in Awassa where I preached on the Sunday was one of the largest in Ethiopia. 2000 people gather at 6.00 every morning to pray. There were 6000 in the 9am service. They have six branch churches with a total membership of 12,000. God is doing amazing things in Ethiopia and I'm so grateful to have had the privilege of teaching and preaching there over those few years.

And I'm grateful, too, that we were able to fund the translation into Amharic of Body Builders, my book on spiritual gifts. Despite the massive growth of the church, Ethiopian church leaders recognise their need of sound biblical teaching and if I have made at least a small contribution to that, the Lord be praised.

Ile de la Réunion (Reunion Island)

Located in the Indian Ocean between Africa and India, the Ile de la Réunion is an overseas French territory. I have already mentioned in an earlier chapter how in 2004 I was the main speaker at the French National Pastors' Conference in Bordeaux. It was there that I met David Cizéron who told me about his father's work in Réunion and gave me a book about him. Aimé Cizeron was now with the Lord, but I was fascinated with the account of his apostolic ministry as a result of which some 40 churches had been planted all over the island.

So I was pleasantly surprised a year later to receive an invitation to be a guest speaker at the 40th Anniversary Celebration of the founding of ADD in Réunion in 2006. They were happy to pay the airfares for both Eileen and me and, as I learnt later, as a tropical island Réunion is a much sought after holiday destination particularly for the French. But we had accepted the invitation well before we knew all this because I was determined to visit the place where 5000 people were gathering within four weeks of the start of Cizéron's ministry as a result of the miracles of healing that were taking place.

So in April 06 we flew to Réunion via Paris, landing at the Roland Garros airport to be greeted by a TV crew asking how we were expecting the eight days of meeting to go. I was very tired after what had been an extremely long journey, made worse by an eleven hour delay in Paris, and simply replied, I believe the Lord will bless us greatly, which he certainly did.

But that did not mean that everything would go smoothly. The very next day, our hosts, Patrick and Joanna, were showing us round a market in Saint Denis when they met a friend and introduced us to her. She then said something very strange: You are not afraid of the Chikungunya? Now there were some live chickens for sale in the market and, not knowing what Chikungunya was, I thought it must be something to do with chickens.

But no. Chikungunya is a highly infectious disease borne by mosquitoes and potentially fatal! The entire island was affected by it and we had not noticed the warnings about it when we arrived at the airport. We found out later that Tom Trask, American AoG General Superintendent and guest speaker at the conference, had been warned about it in advance, but somehow no one had thought to tell us.

But despite all that, we had a great eight days of meetings and the Lord not only preserved us from the chikungunya but greatly blessed all the meetings and ministry. So much so that we were invited back the following year for a longer visit where I conducted seminars for the pastors on spiritual gifts, preached in two evangelistic meetings, and took a series of Bible studies from Monday to Friday in the church in Saint Denis.

The people were really hungry for the Word of God. In each evangelistic meeting over 200 people came forward in response to the gospel appeal, and there were over 700 each night for each of the Bible studies. My subject, as usual, was spiritual gifts, but I shall never forget the remarkable way some one came to Christ at the close of one of those meetings. But first I need to tell you about Véronique.

Véronique was a kind lady who took us to explore various parts of the island during the daytime when there were no meetings until the evening. Réunion is a volcanic island and one such trip involved driving to the top of the volcano and then walking down into its crater. This was apparently quite safe even though the volcano erupted quite frequently and the steam was still rising from the lava months after the last eruption.

One of the days we were there was a public holiday and Véronique had taken her children to the beach. While she was there she told a friend about the meetings and persuaded her to come. She came to the meeting and was so overwhelmed by the worship that she felt she had to leave. But when she was about ten minutes away from the church she suddenly heard the music from the church coming through her mobile phone. No one had called her and, unable to think of any natural explanation, she felt compelled to return to the meeting. She sat through it in tears and at the end, although I had not made a gospel appeal, came forward and asked how she could be saved. It was such a joy to be able to lead her to the Lord and to learn later that she was regularly attending her local ADD church.

So the Lord was using us and blessing us in so many different ways and I look back on those years with great gratitude to God. Next time I'll be talking about our trip to India in 2010 when I began to experience very real health challenges for the first time in my life.

View Details

My Story Talk 31 Life after Mattersey (1)

Welcome to Talk 31 in our series where I'm reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. In this talk I shall begin to talk about our life and ministry after we left Mattersey. I'll explain why I decided to retire from Mattersey when I did and why we moved to Devon. I'll describe my continuing involvement with Mattersey for a further 12 years and conclude by outlining our wider ministry in Europe.

Why I decided to retire when I did

In 2004 both Eileen and I had reached the age of 65. As was customary for women at that time, Eileen had retired as Matron of the College five years previously and I had told the Lord that, unless he clearly showed me that I was to stay on, I would retire as Principal when I was 65. First and foremost, we both wanted only to do what the Lord wanted and as we prayed about it became convinced that the time was right for our departure.

Our decision was based on several facts. The Lord had not given us any indication that I should stay on, and he had clearly shown me that the man who would be appointed as my successor would be the man of his choosing. And, as I mentioned in an earlier talk, I had already discussed the matter with other leaders who had agreed with me that the timing was right.

It was not as if my relationship with Mattersey was at an end. I was not retiring from Mattersey. I was retiring as its Principal. Increasing requests for my ministry overseas had meant that a decision had to be made. I could not do justice to my role as Principal and accept so many invitations to minister elsewhere. But that did not mean that I could not continue to teach in the College as a visiting lecturer, and, at the kind invitation of successive principals, I continued to do so for another 12 years.

Why we moved to Devon

Of course we had always known that we would have to move because the house we were living in belonged to the College and would be needed by my successor. And we knew that we would have to move immediately. That's why we were considering our options two or three years beforehand.

Colin Whittaker had written to me encouraging me to move right away from Mattersey and Eileen and I both felt that this would be wise. For one thing, the new principal would almost certainly want to make some changes and it would be easier both for him and us if we were not living close by and being asked by our friends in the local church if we approved! Apart from that, our first consideration, wherever we moved, was to be sure that there was a good local AoG church within easy reach where we could become members. Of course, there were plenty of places like that all over the country, so why did we choose Devon? One option might be to move near to one of our children, but as they were all serving the Lord in different parts of the country and might move on at any time, that might not be the wisest course of action.

So we felt it would be better both for them and for us if we were to move to a part of the country where the grandchildren would enjoy coming for their holidays. And we could think of no better place than Devon. I had been there on holiday as a teenager, and it was there that I had felt God calling me to the ministry. We knew that there were three AoG churches in Torbay, one in Torquay, one in Paignton, and one in Brixham, where Bob Hyde, one of our former students, was the full-time pastor and leader of the ministry team. Bob had invited me down to minister on at least two occasions and we were very happy with the way the church was structured and with the spiritual atmosphere in the meetings.

Neither of the other churches had invited us to minister and so we knew very little about them, so we started to seriously consider fellowshipping with the Brixham assembly if we were able to afford to move into the Torbay area. I phoned Bob and asked if he would be happy about this, explaining that I was not looking for any position in the church and that my ministry would be further afield.

For two or three years we had been looking at property prices in the area and, as it was not convenient to make regular 600 mile round trips to view properties as they came on the market, decided on a new property that was to be built in Paignton. We were able to view one just like it and choose a plot where another was to be built – a four-bedroom house with spectacular views over open countryside and the sea, the nearest beach being only a ten-minute drive away.

We decided very quickly that this would be the house for us and, because of God's wonderful provision, were able to buy it in 2003 and move in immediately after we retired from Mattersey in July 2004. We spent ten very happy years there until we felt the Lord prompting us to move into Brixham to be nearer to the church in 2013, more of which later. Meanwhile I continued to teach at Mattersey and expand our travelling ministry overseas.

Continuing Ministry at Mattersey

It was always a great joy to revisit Mattersey each year to teach various M.Th. courses, specialising on The Baptism in the Holy Spirit, Spiritual Gifts, and Divine Healing. Each time we stayed with our friends, William and Anthea Kay who were still living close to Mattersey and enjoyed renewed fellowship with them.

It was on one such occasion, in September 2005, that Eileen was involved in a serious accident. I was teaching a combined class of students in the College chapel when I was surprised to see Dr Dave Allen come in at the back. He walked quietly forward and approached me on the platform. Then he whispered to me,

You need to go. Eileen is all right, but she's been involved in an accident. I'll take over here. They'll tell you more in the office.

The accident had happened less than a mile outside Mattersey on the Retford Road. Someone, I don't remember who, drove me there immediately and the first thing I saw was a fire engine and an ambulance. I was so glad that Dave Allen had already told me that Eileen was all right, or I would almost certainly have feared the worst. I later discovered a voice-mail message on my phone, which had been switched onto silent while I was lecturing. It was Eileen saying,

David, I've been in an accident. You need to come. I can't breathe…

… and her voice petered out. I'm so grateful that I didn't receive that message until after I knew she was all right. It was the airbag that had saved her, but the pressure of it was causing the difficulty in her breathing.

The accident was not Eileen's fault. She was driving into Retford to do some shopping when another car coming in the opposite direction overtook a cyclist on a blind bend and crashed head-on into Eileen. As both cars were probably travelling at 50 m.p.h., the full force of the impact would have been about 100 m.p.h. Both cars were a write-off and the other driver was told that she would probably never walk again as a result of the injuries she suffered. Eileen escaped with two cracked ribs from which she recovered relatively quickly.

Our insurance company provided a courtesy car for us and a few days later we drove home to Devon after I had finished the series of lectures I had been giving. Fortunately, we had enough money to buy a replacement vehicle without waiting for the insurance settlement to come through, as less than a week later I was committed to teach an MA course at the Continental Theological Seminary in Brussels. We were both so grateful for the loving care of Trude and Sylve, twin sisters from our church in Brixham who looked after Eileen during my absence. I have always been amazed at Eileen's patience and fortitude in situations like this and the courage she displayed in face of adversity. I have already mentioned this when speaking about the accident which prevented her from travelling with me to Burkina Faso. But these qualities became even more evident in later life about which I will say more in a later talk.

A Wider Ministry

Apart from my continuing input at Mattersey in the years that followed our departure to Devon in 2004, much of my ministry involved teaching in Bible Colleges and speaking at National Conferences overseas. Invitations came from former students and because of contacts through EPTA, PEF, and the PWF. Eileen was usually able to accompany me and between 2005 and 2012 I ministered in churches, colleges and conferences in Belgium, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Ireland, Luxembourg, Madeira, Netherlands, Nigeria, Poland, Portugal, Réunion, Slovakia, South Africa, Sweden, and Ukraine. In this talk we'll just be referring to countries in Europe.

Some of these places I visited only once, while others, like Finland and Belgium, were countries where I taught in their Bible colleges annually. The subject was almost invariably connected with the work of the Holy Spirit – his person and work, the baptism in the Spirit, spiritual gifts, and healing. Of particular importance was the time I spent with pastors and national leaders sharing with them on how to encourage spiritual gifts in the local church.

Places I visited only once during these years were Sweden (05), Ukraine (06), Poland (07), and Slovakia (08). Eileen accompanied me on the trips to Sweden, for a week's teaching in Kristinehamn, and Slovakia, for an EPTA conference in the vicinity of Bratislava. I travelled unaccompanied to Poland to teach for a week in the Warsaw Theological Seminary and preach in the local Pentecostal church.

But when I visited Ukraine I was part of a three-man team from our church in Brixham. As it was my first (and only) visit, Bob Hyde and Mark Goodyear, both of whom had been before, let me do most of the teaching. In all the churches we visited the subject they asked me to speak on was spiritual gifts. There, as is sadly the case in so many places elsewhere, there is very little teaching on this important subject, so when the opportunity was given in each church, at the end of the meeting the people flocked forward for prayer.

Visits I made to Ireland (06, 07, 08) were mainly in connection with my new role as a member of the Board of Governors of the Irish AoG Bible College in Greystones, a seaside village a few miles south of Dublin, where Daniel Caldwell, a former Mattersey student was now the Principal and where several other Mattersey graduates like Roy Leith and Sandy Tutty were now involved . I also had the privilege of preaching at their graduation service in September 07.

Eileen and I had often visited our friends John and Ann Leese in Luxembourg as we were en route for our holidays in France or Germany and were always grateful for their hospitality. And in 2006 I was asked to be the guest speaker at their church's weekend retreat held in Arlon in nearby Belgium. It was always a joy to renew fellowship with our friends from that wonderful church. I also preached there in September 2012 after teaching at CTS in Brussels and before driving on for a week's teaching in churches in the Paris area of France.

Over a period of about 20 years we regularly went to France for our holidays and I would often end up preaching in one of the ADD (AoG) churches there. I don't have detailed dates for these occasions, but I remember preaching in Auch, Bordeaux, Clermont Ferrand, Metz, Mourrenx, Toulouse, and Versailles, sometimes with less than 24 hours notice! But perhaps the most interesting part of France we ever visited was the Ile de la Réunion. To which I will return next time.

The countries I visited most frequently were Germany (3x), Portugal (4x), Belgium (8x), and Finland (11x). With the exception of Germany, this was because I was annually teaching in their Bible Colleges. Having said that, in 2009 I did teach for a week at Kniebis in the Black Forest at the European Theological Seminary, a beautiful college belonging to the Church of God, where the EPTA conference was to be held the following week.

And in 2007, after attending a PEF related conference in Oslo, Norway, we flew to Germany to conduct seminars at the national pastors' conference of the BFP (Bund Freikirchlicher Pfingstgemeinden), the nearest equivalent to the AoG in Germany. It was also in Oslo that I bumped into Werner Fraas, the president of the Volksmission group of German churches and was invited to conduct a tour of their churches in southern Germany in 2008. Eileen always remembered this well as we slept in a least ten different beds during the course of two weeks' ministry there before driving on to the EPTA conference in Slovakia.

I first visited Portugal in 1982 for an EPTA conference, but it was many years later that I had the opportunity to teach in their Bible College and preach in their churches. Harry Osland was an American missionary who, at the time, was director of the Portuguese Bible College in Fanhoes near Lisbon. It so happened that in 2006 he was in an MA class I was teaching in Belgium at the Continental Theological Seminary and he asked me if I would be willing to come to teach in Portugal.

So for three years (07, 08, and 09) I spent a week or so in Portugal, teaching in their college and preaching in their churches. Harry not only organised the itinerary for me but also arranged for several of my books to be translated into Portuguese. He and his wife Beth became good friends and Eileen and I really appreciated their kindness and hospitality.

Another contact I had with Portugal was Reginaldo Azevedo de Melo, a Brazilian brother based in Portugal who came to Mattersey as one of our students. With the cooperation of Pastor Luis Reis, who knew me through PEF, after he graduated Reginaldo arranged an itinerary for me preaching in several churches.

Our trips the Portugal gave us a taste for Portuguese cuisine, something we also experienced in Madeira, a Portuguese overseas territory, and popular holiday destination because of its pleasant climate all the year round. We first went there in 2008 courtesy of our friends William and Anthea Kay who let us use their lovely time-share apartment. This inspired us to get our own time-share and we returned for three weeks in 2010 when I was asked to preach in the small AoG church in Funchal, about which I shall say more later.

My ministry in Belgium was due first to my work with the International Correspondence Institute, which I referred to in an earlier talk, and secondly, to my contact with CTS, the Continental Theological Seminary, through fellowship with friends in EPTA. Roland and Judy Dudley, American AoG missionaries, had led the Portuguese Bible College back in the eighties and had moved on to Sint-Pieters-Leeuw near Brussels to head up CTS. At Roland's invitation I taught on the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, Spiritual Gifts, and Divine Healing on their MA programme for eight consecutive years (2005-2012). I was often asked to preach in their chapel services when we saw many students receive the baptism in the Spirit. Eileen and I were housed in one of the well-equipped apartments in the college.

We always enjoyed our visits to Belgium and took the opportunity to admire the wonderful architecture in cities like Brussels and Ghent as well as preaching in churches there. And every year we were at CTS made sure that we made a visit to the outlet store of a nearby chocolate factory and bring back plenty in time for Christmas!

And finally Finland, a country we visited even more often that Belgium. Apart from my contact with Teuvo Valkama that I mentioned in an earlier talk, it was friends I met at PEF and EPTA meetings who were the main instigators of our visits to that beautiful country. I first met Arto Hamalainnen at the ICCOWE conference in Brighton in June 1991 but later got to know him much better as we both served on the PEF Presidium, he as secretary and I as vice-chairman. Arto was the Missions Director for the Finnish Pentecostal Churches and was responsible for recommending me for my first visit to Ethiopia in 2005 and my visit to India in 2010, about which I will say more next time.

But it was Pasi Parkkila, the Director of the Finnish Bible College, who was responsible for most of our visits to Finland. I first met Pasi at an EPTA conference – I don't remember which, possibly at CTS in 02 or in Nantwich in 04 – but he asked me if I would be willing to teach on their MA programme at Iso Kirja, which incidentally means The Great Book – what a name for a Bible College! So, apart from 2010 when I was too unwell to go, I taught at Iso Kirja the same subjects as I was teaching at CTS every year from 2005 to 2012. But apart from teaching at Iso Kirja I also visited Finland for the EPTA conference in 06 and was the guest speaker at their National Pastors' Conference both in 08 and 09.

Eileen invariably travelled with me on our visits to Iso Kirja when most years we were accommodated in a comfortable log cabin overlooking a beautiful lake. Tuula, Pasi's wife, a primary school teacher, kindly loaned us her car throughout our visits which gave us a measure of independence while we were there enabling us to drive into the nearest town, Keuruu, or to Jyväskylä a larger town a little further away.

We were also able to visit a number of churches during our trips, including one at Seinäjoki where outstanding miracles of healing were regularly taking place in their meetings. From the reports I was hearing I could hardly imagine that there was anyone in the church left with a problem, but after my preaching some fifty or sixty people came forward for prayer, all expecting to be personally prayed for. And as we had to communicate through an interpreter this inevitable took twice as long as usual. An hour and a half after the end of the meeting I laid hands on the last person and was feeling in need of prayer myself. I was extremely tired and hungry but felt I had learnt a lesson – even when miracles are happening there will always be people in need of prayer.

Perhaps the final thing to say about Finland is that at the request of Aikamedia, the Finnish Publishing Department, at least four of my books have been published in Finnish. I am encouraged that my teaching in Finland still goes on even though I have not been there in person since 2012.

The Lord had certainly extended the scope of my ministry and confirmed that it was right for us to leave Mattersey when we did.

Next time we'll talk about our trips to Reunion, Africa and India.

View Details

My Story Talk 30 Finding my successor and saying farewell to Mattersey

Welcome to Talk 30 in our series where I am reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. Today my subject is finding my successor and saying farewell to Mattersey.

From all I have said so far it has been clear that the Lord had abundantly blessed our work for him at Mattersey and there was no requirement that I should retire in 2004 at the age of 65. The system at the time was that my name was put forward for re-election every four years and the next time this was to happen was in 2003. There was little doubt that I would be re-elected if I let my name go forward, but did I want to serve another four years and continue until I was 68? More importantly, what did the Lord want?

It was clear that he had been blessing my ministry beyond the College for some years and an increasing number of doors were opening for me, particularly with regard to teaching internationally on the baptism and gifts of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps I would be able to continue teaching in the College but make room for someone else to take over the principalship.

The more I thought about this the more I felt it was right. Guidance comes in a variety of ways, sometimes supernaturally and quite dramatically, and at others by an increasing inner conviction that a particular course of action is the right one. I have already described the wonderful way the Lord led us to Mattersey and how, soon after we arrived there he confirmed that the building we were planning was his plan too. But now, as no clear guidance was forthcoming, I decided that we just had to do what we felt was right and ask the Lord to intervene if it was not his will.

I wondered if the AoG Conference would agree to let me put my name forward for just one more year, instead of the usual four and decided to talk to my friend Paul Weaver, the AoG General Superintendent about this. A suitable opportunity arose when we both arrived a day early for a PEF meeting in Prague and were both accommodated in the same hotel.

Paul assured me that he felt that, if I decided to take that route, no one at Conference would raise an objection, and we started to explore possibilities about who would be my successor. Colleagues had already told me that they couldn't think of anyone suitable, but I realised that, whoever they were, my successor didn't need to be another David Petts. Talking to Paul, I suggested four names who I thought could do the job and he agreed.

However, I need to make it clear that it was not my responsibility to appoint my successor, though I would be part of the interview panel and hopefully people would prayerfully consider any suggestion I might make. Having informally agreed these things with Paul, I referred the matter to the Board of Governors and the Executive Council who all agreed with the procedure I was suggesting.

As a result, Paul Alexander, a South African who had been a student at Mattersey and who had gone on to found the Africa School of Missions and who had been one of the four names I had mentioned to Paul Weaver, was appointed as Principal with effect from summer 2004. He was, however, expected to work alongside me from 2003 so as to get used to the way we were doing things. I personally felt it a pity that he never really did so, but he did, nevertheless make an excellent Principal and invited me to continue teaching annually on the Master's programme, which I did until 2015.

But before Paul finally took over the reins suitable arrangements had to be made to celebrate the years we had spent at Mattersey. The Board of Governors asked me what I would like, and I said that I wanted opportunity to say thank you to all who had made possible the things we had accomplished together over the past 27 years.

As a result, we ended up with no less than four celebrations. First there was a sumptuous buffet banquet at the General Conference for all former students, staff and faculty who were able to attend. Then, in the final week of the Summer Term there was a celebration meal for all the present students. This was followed a day or so later by another meal for all the staff and faculty, past and present, who had ever served the College during my principalship.

And finally, there was the Graduation Service on the Saturday where Ken Morgan, the Chair of the Board of Governors, expressed appreciation on behalf of the College and handed me a generous cheque. It was also the occasion when the University of Wales conferred upon me the honour of appointing me as an Honorary Academic Fellow of the university. I, of course, expressed my appreciation to all concerned and welcomed Paul Alexander as the new Principal. Two days later we vacated the house we had lived in for 25 years and moved to Devon, grateful to God for all he had done and excited about all he was yet to do. But that's the subject of the next talk.

Meanwhile, by way of a summary of our years at Mattersey, I want to read you my final report as Bible College Principal to the AoG Conference held in 2004:

Thanks be to God…

This is something of a special occasion as this will be the last report that I shall write as the Principal of the Bible College. I intend, therefore, instead of reporting on events in the college over the past 12 months, to look back over the 34 year period of my relationship with the college, and especially the 27 years of my principalship, in order that I might place on record my profound gratitude to God for all he has done, and to those who have helped to make it all possible.

My relationship with the college goes back to 1970 when, at the invitation of the Principal, George Jeffreys Williamson, I became a visiting lecturer. It was during that period when, in January 1972, God spoke to me supernaturally in the middle of the night and told me that I was going to live at the Bible College.

When David Powell became Principal in 1973 and the college moved to Mattersey, he continued to use me as a visiting lecturer until, in 1976, I was appointed by Conference as a member of the Board of Governors.

In 1977 David Powell offered himself for re-election but withdrew his name at the last minute at conference. This led to my sharing the principalship for a year with Alfred Missen and Keith Munday whose experience, expertise and advice were to prove of great value to me. I was finally appointed Principal in 1978 and took up residence at Mattersey in June of that year.

… for what he has done

The purpose of the college has always been to prepare men and women for Christian service at home and overseas. I feel deeply privileged to have been involved in the training of well over 1000 full-time students during my time as Principal.

On leaving college many have gone into church leadership roles and those who have not have been better equipped to serve the Lord in other capacities. In recent years, since we developed our degree programme up to 10 each year have gone into school teaching. Several are now in prominent positions in the Fellowship nationally or regionally. Others are doing a great job for God overseas. We are so grateful that the money we invested by giving scholarships to students from India and Africa has resulted over the years in many churches being planted in those countries.

It is because I passionately believe that the training Mattersey provides results in a better-equipped Christian leadership that we have sought from the start to expand the number of students as far as our capacity and ability would allow. As a result I am pleased to report that there are some 500+ students who are currently engaged on courses provided by Mattersey Hall compared with the 48 we started with in 1978. We started the current year with 126 full time BA students, 56 part time MTh students, and 323 students enrolled on our distance learning courses. This growth has only been made possible by the development of both the programme and the campus.

As far as the programme is concerned, much has been added over the years. Whereas we originally offered only a two-year diploma programme where all students took all the same subjects, we now provide a varied curriculum with specialist options for training in the specific areas where students are gifted or to which they feel called. Details of these are to be found in the latest college prospectus and there is no need to mention them here. Suffice it to say that Mattersey now offers courses that combine both academic excellence and practical relevance with a spiritual dynamic that reflects our Pentecostal heritage.

But the development of the programme has only been possible because of the development on the campus. Thanks to the many gifts we received from churches and individuals, particularly back in the 1980s, the Lord has enabled us to improve the facilities on campus beyond recognition. This may be summarised as follows:

1979

Construction of the Principal's house

1980s

Erection of the hall of residence providing 120 individual study-bedrooms for students

Purchase of playing field doubling the size of campus to 14 acres.

1998

Erection of new chapel and three new classrooms.

We are very grateful to property trust for the help they have given us in providing a mortgage for this and for other assistance they have given from time to time.

In connection with all of the above, I wish to place on record my sincere appreciation for the faith of those who have served on the Board of Governors and for the support they have given me over the years. It has not all been easy, but the Lord has stood by us and by his grace we now have a campus equipped with facilities commensurate with the task that we seek to undertake.

… for those who have helped

Of course, there have been many helpers along the way. It gives me great pleasure to place on record my sincere appreciation to all who have served the College in any way during the course of my principalship. Worthy of special mention are my wife, Eileen, who served as Matron for 21 years; Dave and Beryl Allen who have worked with me full time since 1983; Brian Quar, whose experience in the building industry was most valuable to us in our major building projects; and William Kay, who has encouraged me and helped me to bring the college to its present academic standard. However, I am no less grateful to all who have played their part and accordingly I honour them here. (There then follows a long list).

My thanks to them all, and to any whose names I may have inadvertently omitted.

…for what the future holds

Finally, It seems appropriate to say a word as to what I feel the future holds. As far as the college is concerned, it is clear that the job is by no means finished. I have every confidence in Paul Alexander and I know that he has a vision for further growth and expansion. I entrust to his care the college I have been privileged to lead for 27 years and the gifted and dedicated team who have been working with me. I pray that he will be able to take the college further than I have been able to. May the Lord inspire him and direct him to that end. I believe with all my heart that Mattersey is the best – though not the only – means we have of preparing men and women for the ministry. Potential leaders need to be encouraged to make the most of the great opportunity it offers.

As for me, I have made it clear that I am not retiring from ministry. The call of God is as strong as ever. I am relinquishing my responsibilities as Principal in order to be free to serve in a wider capacity. As long as the Lord enables, I shall continue to preach and teach and write. I shall remain a member of the Board of Governors, though now in an emeritus capacity. Paul has kindly asked me to continue to teach some part time courses that relate to the work of the Spirit, and this I have agreed to do. I will be happy to support him in any way I can.

Thank you for giving me the great privilege of serving you. When all is said and done, I have only done what it was my duty to do (Luke 17: 10). But it has given me great joy to do it.

To God alone be all the glory!

Respectfully submitted

David Petts, Principal

View Details

My Story Talk 29 Travels in Asia and Africa

My first trip outside of Europe or America was in 1986 when I visited Pakistan, India, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia. It came about in a quite remarkable way. One Sunday in 1985 I was reading an article about India in a Christian magazine when quite unexpectedly I had the distinct impression that the Lord was going to send me to India. I told Eileen about it and we agreed to wait and see what would happen. The very next Wednesday evening we had a meeting in the College chapel where the guest speaker was Ray Belfield who had come to challenge the students about overseas missions.

After the meeting Ray came round to our house for a hot drink before making the return journey back to Wigan. As we prayed together just before he left, I found myself praying that the Lord would show us how best we as a College could support the work of missions, and the moment I had finished Ray said to me,

I'll tell you what you can do. You can go to India.

I had told him nothing about what had happened the previous Sunday, so this seemed to be a real confirmation of what I felt the Lord had been telling me. But how would I raise the airfare?

Shortly after that, Bob Stevenson was the speaker at a similar Wednesday evening meeting, and at the end of his message he totally surprised me. He said to the students,

Now the Principal doesn't know I'm going to do this. In fact, I haven't asked anyone's permission to do so, but I want us to take an offering now. It's for your Principal's airfare to India.

And the airfare was covered. The following January I went to India.

In fact it was not just India. That month I visited Pakistan, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia as well.

I travelled first to Pakistan and preached for a weekend in Karachi. This was my first experience outside of Europe or America and the culture shock was massive. And it wasn't helped by a severe attack of sickness and diarrhoea! I was so grateful that my friend Dr John Tonge had told me to pack some Imodium tablets! As a result, I was able to preach but sadly unable to eat any of the wonderful food they offered me.

On the Monday I flew on to India with an empty stomach but soon recovered very quickly. I landed in Bombay (now Mumbai) and flew on to Coimbatore in the province of Tamil Nadu where AoG missionaries, Lawrence and Margaret Livesey, had planted churches decades earlier. It was truly wonderful to see the results of their sacrificial labours.

I spent a little over two weeks there, preaching, teaching and visiting orphanages and schools run by the churches. David Prakasam and Lawrence Arumanayagam had both been students at Mattersey and were now training others to plant churches. One of the greatest thrills of my trip was to visit some of the many churches that had been planted by the students of our students. I saw very clearly that what we were doing at Mattersey was following Paul's instruction to Timothy in 2 Timothy 2:2.

The rest of my trip was spent in short visits to Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia. I was based with Cyril and Barbara Cross, British AoG missionaries in Singapore, who looked after me very well. Before I flew back home I had the privilege of preaching in Bible College chapel in Kuala Lumpur, a large AoG church in Singapore, and a very lively house group led by an eighteen-year-old girl in Medan, Indonesia. If I had ever had doubts about women's ministry in the past, that girl's anointed leadership gift was more than enough to change my mind.

My final trip to countries beyond Europe while we were still at Mattersey was to Burkina Faso in the year 2000. Several of our students at Mattersey had come from that part of Africa, formerly known as the Upper Volta. Like our students from India, most of them came on full scholarships which we provided for them. The first of these was Guetawende Roamba, the student I mentioned earlier who had recognised that a woman speaking in tongues in a College rally in Manchester was speaking in Moré, his own native language.

Another, who came a few years later, was Philippe Ouédraogo who when he first arrived at Mattersey couldn't speak a word of English. I remember picking him up at Retford Station and speaking to him in French, giving him his first English lesson on the ten-minute journey back to College. Passing a field of cows, I pointed at them and said, les vaches, en anglais, COWS. Not that that piece of information would be much help for his studies at Mattersey! But it was a start, and Philippe became remarkably proficient in English in just a few weeks.

It was through him that we received the invitation to visit Burkina Faso in November 2000. Eileen was very much looking forward to coming with me but unfortunately was prevented from doing so at the last minute. Eileen had retired in 1999 after serving as College Matron for 21 years and was at home in the utility room doing some decorating. As she was putting up a frieze she climbed onto the washing machine to help her reach the top of the wall and losing her balance fell off it backwards onto the hard floor, breaking the top of her arm close to the shoulder.

On hearing the news I was home within minutes – our house was in the College grounds – and rushed her to A&E who confirmed the fracture and strongly advised her not to make the trip to Africa. And when I arrived there a few days later and experienced travelling on their bumpy roads, it was clear that we had made the right decision. The leaders in Ouagadougou were so impressed that she had let me come that they sent me home a few days earlier than planned.

The highlights of the trip were preaching several times in French at the National Pastors' Conference, having a meal with, I think, seven of our former students, and being taken to visit some of the villages in the surrounding area. I shall never forget a lady giving me one of her chickens as a thank you for visiting her humble home and being taken by Philippe to a pool inhabited by several alligators.

One of them, about eight to ten feet in length, was basking in the sun on the edge of the bank. Although they were wild animals Phillippe persuaded me to approach it from behind while he threw it a chicken. He then encouraged me to pick up its tail and I, not liking to appear not to trust him, cautiously did as he said. And there was no reaction from the animal! So I was able to tell the grandchildren what I had done and show them a photo to prove it, warning them never to anything so foolish!

But actually it wasn't quite as foolish as it sounds. The alligators were indeed wild, but as Philippe explained to me, the people who were not yet Christians worshipped these animals and regularly brought them food. As a result they had become relatively tame. There was, of course, an element of danger – you never know what a wild animal might do – but they were, oxymoronically, tame wild animals!

I am so grateful to the Lord not only for the privilege of visiting so many different countries and cultures, and for so many opportunities to be a blessing to so many people, but also for the fun I've had in doing so. And this was to continue for years after my retirement from Mattersey. But before that could happen a very important decision had to be made. Who was to be my successor?

Next time I'll tell you how that decision was made.

View Details

My Story Talk 28 Activities Beyond Europe

Welcome to Talk 28 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Looking back on it, I suppose I travelled fairly widely during the time we were at Mattersey. Apart from the many places in Europe we visited, I found myself on the Lord’s business in America, Africa, and Asia, though never, incidentally in Australia. These visits, which cover the period from 1982 to 2004, were either in connection with the Pentecostal World Conference which later became the Pentecostal World Fellowship or preaching trips

The Pentecostal World Conference

My reason for attending the Pentecostal World Conference in Oslo in 1992 was that, because it was being held in Europe, the PEF presidium had decided to hold a committee meeting there at the same time. Eileen and I had visited Norway for the first time two years previously where we had enjoyed a holiday there before attending the EPTA conference in Lillehammer. This time, however, I was alone.

During one of the mornings, I was sitting high up at the back of the auditorium and was surprised to hear my name mentioned at the close of the session. Dr Ray Hughes was asking me to see him on the platform during the coffee break. I couldn’t imagine why but, of course, went to see him as requested. This was not quite as easy as it sounds because to get there I had to make my way through hundreds of people who were exiting the venue and all walking in the opposite direct from me.

When I finally got there, he said to me,

Oh David, as you know, you’ve been appointed to the Advisory Committee, and we’d like you to sit on the platform with us for the rest of the conference.

Well, I knew nothing about this appointment. It was a complete surprise and when a year or so later I was elected to the Presidium it was an even greater honour.

The 1995 conference was particularly special because it was held in Jerusalem. And this time Eileen came with me. We had never been in Israel before and we made sure that we saw as many of the biblical sites as possible. We had booked a tour with a Christian company and travelled in a small coach with a group of Brits who were attending the conference, and it was there that we met Ivor and Jan Maddison who were pastoring the church in Ollerton, not far from Mattersey. (We got to know Jan very well when she came to live in Brixham after Ivor had died).

The tour involved a visit to Tiberias on the shore of Lake Galilee from where we visited Capernaum, took a trip across the lake in a boat like those used by Jesus’ disciples and from which he calmed the storm, and had a meal on the lake shore eating ‘St. Peter’s fish’, so called because of the occasion where he found a coin in the fish’s mouth. We went to Caesarea Philippi, a beautiful place, where Peter confessed Jesus as the Christ. We visited the place in the river Jordan where Jesus is believed to have been baptised, and further south we had a brief stop in Jericho.

We travelled up from there to Jerusalem in time for the conference and of course visited Bethlehem and all the places you would expect, many of which have been spoilt by centuries of tradition and tourism. Eileen got to see Nazareth, but I missed the trip because I had to be in a presidium meeting.

Highlights in Jerusalem were the Garden of Gethsemane, and the via dolorosa. But without a doubt the visit to the garden tomb was by far the most moving. It may or may not have been the actual site of Jesus’ burial and resurrection, although I like to think that it was, but it was certainly a powerful reminder of the truth – Jesus is not here, he is risen! And who could forget the visit to the Upper Room and joining with other Pentecostals in speaking in tongues as the first disciples did in Acts 2?

After the conference we visited Masada, floated on the Dead Sea where it’s impossible to sink, and went to the cave where the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered. It was there, I think, that we paid an Arab to let us take a photo of his camel! We also visited a museum where we saw a number of ancient seals, some dating back over three thousand years, and reminding us of Paul’s teaching that after we believed we were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.

So during the trip there was much to remind us of Bible times and the truth of God’s word. We were glad that we went but have never had a wish to return. Eileen is now enjoying the heavenly Jerusalem and one day I will join her there. And all because of Jesus!

In 1998 the conference was held in Seoul, Korea, at the vast Yoido Full Gospel Church led by David Yongghi Cho, numbering at the time some 720,000 members. We had at first thought to extend the trip and visit China and the Great Wall. Eileen had always had a great interest in China, but when it turned out that the visit was not feasible she decided not to accompany me.

I had met Cho at the London world conference in 1976 when I gave him a copy of my book, Know the Truth, later to be renamed You’d Better Believe It. I was naturally interested to visit his church and to experience one of the Sunday services there. There were, I think, six services each Sunday to accommodate the vast numbers. Everything had to be organised and left little if any room for the exercise of spiritual gifts like tongues, interpretation and prophecy which we might expect in a smaller congregation. Presumably there was opportunity for such gifts to be experienced in their many home groups.

The final meeting of the conference was held in the Olympic Stadium where it was estimated that over 100,000 people were in attendance. I was privileged to read from the scriptures, which I found a little difficult on this occasion as I had somehow mislaid my glasses on a visit to the Prayer Mountain and was using a pair borrowed from an English brother who was staying in the same hotel as me.

During the conference it was decided to hold the next presidium meeting in Hawaii in 1999. The reasoning seemed to be that as Hawaii is in the Pacific Ocean it was not too far from either Asia or America. However, no one considered the inconvenience for anyone travelling from Europe! But as I was the only European on the presidium I could hardly object.

So that is how I came to fly to Hawaii, a 24 hour journey each way, for a three-day committee meeting! The purpose was to plan for the 2001 conference which was to be held in Los Angeles. Fortunately, the meeting finished a day early and I had a day to spare before flying home. This gave me the opportunity to take a minibus tour of the island, visiting among other things Pearl Harbour and a tropical rain forest. I also experienced macadamia nuts for the first time and learnt that the name comes a Scot named Macadam who first discovered them and who also invented tarmac!

Eileen was able to travel with me for the Los Angeles conference in 2001 and in the week before the conference we both enjoyed a short holiday staying with Brian and Ann Lee, old friends from Retford who had emigrated to La Verne just a few miles from L.A. It was good to renew fellowship with them and to preach in their local AoG church.

At the conference itself I had been asked to chair a theological seminar at which Roger Stronstad, a Canadian scholar whose writings I greatly admired, was to be one of the speakers. The subject was the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and at the last minute, I was asked to be the other speaker deputising for an American brother who was unable to attend. I was so grateful to the Lord for the opportunity he gave me to speak at the conference and the help he gave me to do so.

The last world conference we attended was in South Africa in 2004. This conference was in many ways different from all the others. In the opening meeting the delegates were warmly welcomed by the President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeke who had been deputy president under Nelson Mandela from 1994 to 1999 and served as president from ’99 to 2008. Eileen felt particularly honoured as she was seated right next to him on the front row!

But much more important was the fact that so many participants were from African countries, and the meetings were marked by the freedom of expression so typical of African worship and so different from the formalism we have seen elsewhere even in some Pentecostal meetings. It was something we were to see much more of in later visits to Africa in the years that followed my retirement from Mattersey,

After the conference we hired a car and travelled to the Africa School of Missions founded by Paul Alexander, my newly appointed successor at Mattersey. We broke our journey at Witbank where I preached at two services on the Sunday, travelling on to ASM on the Monday where we were warmly welcomed by the staff. They asked us if we were planning to visit the Kruger National Park, and, when we said no, one of them kindly phoned a relative who worked there and arranged for us to stay for a few nights at Skukuza, one of the safari lodges in the park.

Our accommodation was in an extremely comfortable one-room apartment that looked something like a traditional African hut with a thatched roof. The restaurants served excellent food which was relatively inexpensive and offered views overlooking the wonderful wildlife. We enjoyed every moment we spent at Skukuza, especially when a company of mongooses ran across the compound in single file right in front of us.

But of course it was driving outside the safari park that we saw most of the wildlife. It was early spring in the southern hemisphere, and the leaves had only just begun to appear on the trees and bushes, making it easy to spot whatever animals and birds happened to be in the area. We travelled miles each day, taking care to obey the instruction never to get out of the car except in specially designated safe places.

We were also glad that the car had good air-conditioning because it was often important to ensure the windows were closed. On one occasion we stopped to watch a group of baboons in the road just ahead of us and I closed the electric windows. However, I had momentarily forgotten that, unlike our car at home, our hire car had electric windows only at the front.

We only realised the back ones were still open when a large baboon leapt in onto the back seat attempting to steal our lunch! I turned round and shouted in a loud voice – Eileen later told the grandchildren that Grandad roared like a lion – and thank God, the animal obeyed! Both we and our lunch were safe. After that, we never opened the back windows again for the rest of the trip.

Apart from that, the remainder of our stay there was relatively uneventful. We loved it so much that when I was back at ASM a few years later I borrowed a car and went back there. Our visit was far too short but was the highlight of our trip to South Africa. We were particularly grateful that in such a short time we had managed to see the big five – lion, leopard, elephant, rhino, and buffalo, a wonderful ending to our last Pentecostal World Conference.

Preaching trips

But of course my travels beyond Europe were not limited to my role in the Pentecostal World Fellowship. There were preaching trips as well. At first, these centred on the USA where I combined preaching with raising funds for our building project. An American AoG pastor named Paul Curtis had a burden for Britain came to see me on one of his trips to England and said he would like to help raise funds for our new Hall of Residence.

So at Paul’s invitation, in February ’82 I spent ten days preaching in AoG churches in North Carolina with a view to returning in mid-May for a period of four weeks. I enjoyed the trip in February, and the Lord blessed my ministry, and about £1400 was raised towards our building fund. Hopefully the trip in May-June would be more fruitful in that respect. I was looking forward to it and had bought my flights in advance as that was more economical.

But only a few weeks before the trip Paul contacted me to apologise and tell me that he had been unable to arrange a suitable itinerary for me and that he felt that the time was not right. But I had already bought non-refundable tickets for flights both ways! And I had already planned the timetable at Mattersey to enable me to be away from the college throughout that period! After praying about it I contacted John and Sara Miles who were by then living in Naperville, Illinois, and asked their advice.

Sara suggested that I was in a situation like Abraham’s when he set off not knowing where the Lord would lead him. So I used the air tickets to fly as far as New York and paid the extra to fly on to Chicago where John and Sara collected me from O’Hare airport on May the 18th. When I arrived they told me that they had contacted Richard Dortch, the Superintendent of the Illinois AoG, and that he was arranging an itinerary for me around Illinois where I was already known through my three visits back in the seventies.

I stayed with John and Sara until 6th July preaching in churches in the Chicago area on Sundays and Wednesday evenings. These included Yorkville, Palatine, Dekalb, Naperville, and Lake Villa as well as Chicago itself. I also spent a day at Wheaton College, had lunch with John, who was now a French professor there, and with Peter Kuzmic from Yugoslavia, and saw the wardrobe made famous in C.S. Lewis’s The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

On Thursday the 27th I flew via Denver to San José, California, to visit Bethany Bible College. Dick Foth, who had been the pastor in Urbana where I first preached on my visit to the States in 1972, was now the President of Bethany and I had a couple of useful days with him visiting the college and comparing notes.

I had an interesting experience flying back on the Saturday. The weather was extremely hot and everyone else was dressed in shorts and T shirts. I, however, was still wearing my jacket. As I was waiting in the queue to check in, an airline official approached me and said,

Excuse me, sir. I wonder if you can help me. We’re overbooked in Economy Class, and as you seem to be a suitable gentleman, I wonder if you would mind travelling First Class.

Would I mind! It was the first and only time I have travelled First Class and, although I could never justify the expense of doing so, I was more than happy to enjoy the experience at no extra cost to myself.

On 6th June I left Naperville and flew to Urbana where I preached on the Sunday and where my old friend Jim Hall was now the pastor. The next day I flew to Springfield MO to visit two other AoG colleges, Evangel College and Central Bible College, as well as the Graduate School located in the AoG Headquarters in Boonville Avenue.

When I returned to Urbana on the Friday, Jim Hall had arranged an English Evening where I talked about the spiritual state of the UK and taught the Americans how to make a proper cup of tea! On the Sunday morning, I preached in Normal, where Marvin Foulkes was the pastor. I had preached for Marvin back in ’72 and ’74 and was delighted to see how much the church had grown since then.

In the evening, I preached in Decatur from where I flew back to Chicago ready for my return to England the next day. Looking back on it, I felt that the trip had been very worthwhile, not just because it raised about $5000 for our college, but because of the opportunity it gave me to visit and learn from other AoG colleges and expand my vision for Mattersey. I was very grateful to Richard Dortch for making it possible.

A year later I met Dortch in Portugal at the opening of the new chapel in the Bible College in Fanhões, near Lisbon, and he shared with me that he was soon likely to become the Executive Vice-President at PTL, the centre of Jimmy and Tammy Bakker’s ministry, and he invited me to preach for a week on their TV station. This took place in 1985 and during our stay Eileen, Jonathan, and I were treated to the luxurious accommodation of the Heritage Grand Hotel. And we came home with a significant sum of money for our building fund.

We were, of course, very grateful for their hospitality and generosity, but I confess I was not really comfortable about so much luxury. Coming to terms with the cultural differences and levels of poverty or prosperity we see around the world is by no means easy. The riches of America were in stark contrast with the poverty I was to see in India less than a year later.

But I’ll tell you about that next time.

View Details

My Story Talk 27 More Activities in Europe

Welcome to Talk 27 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I was talking about our off-campus activities while we were at Mattersey. I began by talking about activities in Britain and concluded with our activities in Europe, particularly in connection with EPTA, the European Pentecostal Theological Association.

Today we’ll be saying more about Europe, first with regard to our activities in the Pentecostal European Fellowship, and then about my preaching in national leaders’ conferences as well as in local churches.

The Pentecostal European Fellowship

As I have already explained, PEF was formed as a result of a merger between PEC and EPF. Little did I know when I accepted the invitation to preach at the PEC conference in 1978 that it would eventually lead not only to the founding of EPTA but also to a ministry within PEF itself, and ultimately to representing Europe on the Presidium of the Pentecostal World Conference.

Because of my experience in Europe, I was first asked by the AoG Executive Council, as its chairman, to represent AoG on the PEF committee. Jakob Zopfi from Swtizerland had been its chairman for many years and, after Reinhold Ulonska retired as vice-chairman, the PEF Committee elected me to take his place.

Major features of the work of PEF were the conferences it usually held once every three years. Thousands of people from all over Europe came to these conferences, though the majority on each occasion came from the country that was hosting it. Relatively few, however, came from the UK. This may have been because of the cost of crossing the channel, or even because the preaching was always done through an interpreter which English speaking people often find it hard to get used to.

After preaching at the conference in The Hague in 1978, the next PEF conference we attended was in Böblingen near Stuttgart in 1984, but not in any official capacity. Eileen and I went on to attend conferences in Jönköping, (Sweden, 1991), Bordeaux (France, 1994), Fridek-Mistek (Czech Republic, 1997), Helsinki (Finland, 2000), and Berlin (Germany, 2003).

There are many towns in Sweden with a name ending in -koping. It’s connected with our English word shopping and is roughly equivalent to market. It was at Jönköping (pronounced yernsherping) that I was appointed to serve as Vice Chairman of PEF. We travelled there by car, which may seem surprising bearing in mind the distance, but it meant that Eileen could come with me, and the trip would cost no more than the price of one air ticket for me. And it turned out that, as most of the delegates had arrived by plane, there was little transport available between the hotel and the conference centre.

This meant that we were able to transport Dr Ray Hughes, who was the chairman of the Pentecostal World Conference and the guest speaker from America, to and from the meetings. It gave him the opportunity to get to know us and may have been partly the reason why the following year I was appointed to serve on the PWC advisory committee, and eventually as a member of its presidium.

We also travelled by car to the Bordeaux conference in 1994, combining it with a holiday exploring south-western France and visiting Castera Verduzan in Gascony, and Mauléon-Licharre and Eaux Bonnes in the Pyrenees. The conference was particularly significant for Eileen because she was the wife of the Vice-Chairman. This normally carried no specific responsibility, but Sylvia Zopfi, the wife of the Chairman, had broken her leg and was unable to attend.

Consequently, it fell to Eileen to preside at a meal for ladies, most of whom were French speaking. Of course there was an interpreter, but Eileen never saw herself as an ‘up front’ person and was understandably nervous. Because it was a meal for ladies, I was unable to attend, but I found out later that Herman von Ameron, the husband of the guest speaker, had crept in at the back. So I asked him privately how Eileen had got on, and he replied,

She was magnificent. She was like the Queen!

Following the political reforms known as perestroika introduced by Russian President Mikhail Gorbachov in the late 1980s, Czechoslovakia was divided into two separated nations, the Czech Republic (or Czechia) and Slovakia. Fridek-Mistek was the venue chosen for the 1997 PEF conference, because it lies on the border of these two countries and so provided delegates from both equal opportunities to attend.

Once again, Eileen and I travelled by car, taking extra care in Czechia not to exceed the speed limit, as we’d heard that the Czech police were likely to impose heavy fines on foreigners for any minor infringement. We took the opportunity to visit Prague, a beautiful city, for a weekend before travelling on to the conference.

It was now almost 20 years since I had first preached at the conference in The Hague, but for the next decade I was to become a regular speaker with the special responsibility of preaching on the Baptism in the Holy Spirit and praying for people to receive. Sadly there are still many people who attend Pentecostal churches who have not yet come into the experience and in a conference where thousands are in attendance the numbers coming forward for prayer were likely to be enormous.

Pentecostal pastors often seem reluctant to teach on the subject, possibly because they are frightened that, when they lay hands on those they pray for, they will not begin to speak in tongues. So I felt the need to preach not only to the people, but also to the pastors. And at Fridek-Mistek I decided to pray for the pastors before I prayed for the people. I asked all the pastors who wanted the Lord to use them in laying hands on people to receive the baptism, to come forward first. I explained that I would pray for them first so that they could then join with me in praying for the people.

Dozens of pastors came forward and after I had prayed for them I asked them to turn round and face the congregation. I then called the people to come forward. Hundreds came and each pastor had a queue of people to pray for. Of course, it’s impossible to know how many spoke in tongues for the first time, especially in a meeting where so many different languages are spoken! And, even with the people I personally prayed for, there was no way of knowing if they were speaking in tongues or if they were just praying in their own native language.

But one thing was particularly noteworthy. When teaching on the baptism I have always been careful to stress that the evidence we are expecting is tongues, not tingles – or shaking, or falling over, or anything else that has no clear biblical basis! However, when one of the people I prayed for did fall over, there was an immediate reaction in the queue next to mine. People started to move into my queue. Perhaps they felt that, despite all I had said, they would somehow get something extra if they fell over! There is still a desperate need for teaching on this throughout the Pentecostal movement and the charismatic renewal worldwide.

After the conference we drove into Austria and stayed in an apartment in the church in Bad Ischl where Klaus Winter, the PEF treasurer, was the pastor. I preached in his church and we had a wonderful ten days there exploring Salzburg and the Salzkammergut, the wonderful area where The Sound of Music was filmed.

The Helsinki conference was held in the summer of the year 2000 but was preceded by an EPTA conference held in Kaggeholme near Stockholm. We travelled by car as far as Kaggeholme but after EPTA we parked it at Arlanda airport and flew to Helsinki. As Jakob Zopfi was unable to attend because of an illness, it was my responsibility to chair the conference. I also preached on the baptism in the Holy Spirit and, as at Fridek-Mistek, had the privilege of praying for many who were seeking.

Shortly after that Jakob Zopfi retired as the PEF chairman and I confess that I was rather relieved not to be appointed as his successor. I too was soon to retire from Mattersey and frankly I didn’t want the responsibility. Ingolf Ellsel, a younger man who was the leader of the BFP in Germany, was appointed as chairman, and I was happy to continue to serve as vice chairman.

In 2003 the conference was held in Berlin in June. En route we stopped at Liège preaching there over the weekend. We reached Berlin in good time for the conference travelling at times at almost 150 m.p.h. on the autobahns where there was no speed limit. We stayed in a hotel on the outskirts of Berlin in Spandau, famous for its ballet company, and travelled in by underground train to the conference meetings.

As in previous years I preached and prayed for people to receive the baptism and hundreds came forward. When Ingolf Ellsel asked who had spoken in tongues for the first time it seemed like just about everybody who had been prayed for raised their hand. It was experiences like this that were undoubtedly the reason why I was asked to speak at so many churches and conferences for national leaders.

Churches and National Leaders’ Conferences

During the years I was at Mattersey I spoke at several national leaders’ conferences as well as ministering in local churches. Most of the teaching I did at national conferences centred on the baptism and gifts of the Holy Spirit and how to encourage them at local church level. These included Germany and Hungary (1989), Iceland (1990), Austria (1999), Belgium (2003) and France (2004) where I was required to preach six times in French on a variety of topics.

The conference was held in Léognan, near Bordeaux, and close to the site of the ADD Bible College. (ADD Assemblées de Dieu i.e. AoG). I taught several sessions in the college in the week preceding the conference and then preached at a youth event held in a marquee in the college grounds.

This was an occasion where I really needed the Lord to help me. Of course we always need his help, but this time even more so. I had completely forgotten that I was scheduled to be the speaker at this event, so I said to the principal of the college,

I don’t really need to be at the youth meeting this afternoon, do I?

To which he replied,

Mais si, vous êtes le prédicteur!

(But yes, you are the preacher!)

But I had nothing prepared, and I had never preached to young people in French before. Fortunately, several of my books have been translated into French including The Holy Spirit – an Introduction. I had little more than an hour before the meeting began and so, helped the French text of the section on the fruit of the Spirit, I hurriedly prepared a message on this, using examples from the life of Jesus. And the Lord really blessed it. Dozens of young people came forward responding to the appeal to seek to rededicate their lives to Christ.

That really encouraged me as the I was preaching in the thousand strong assembly in Bordeaux where Daniel Hébert, whom I had met through PEF, was the pastor. But before leaving the subject of national conferences I need to mention that it was at that conference that David Cizéron gave me a book about his father’s work in a part of France I had never heard of, something which will become relevant in a later talk.

As far as preaching in local churches is concerned, there are of course far too many to mention them all. I have already talked about my trips to Sweden when I preached in local churches as well as teaching in Bible Colleges. One highlight of these trips was preaching in the Filadelfia church in Stockholm founded by the renowned Pentecostal pioneer, Lewi Pethrus (whose name, incidentally, features immediately before mine in the International Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements). Another highlight was travelling with Eileen to Kristinehamn at the northern end of Lake Vänern, the largest lake in Sweden, and preaching for a week for Paul Gren, one of our former Mattersey students.

Germany was another country I also visited frequently. My contact with Germany came from three different though interrelated sources – EPTA which I have already mentioned, the national leaders of the Volksmission group of churches, and the local church in Heidenheim.

Herbert Ros and Günter Kaupp were president and vice-president of Volksmission and had both been students at Kenley under the principalships of Donald Gee and John Carter respectively. They both had a great respect for what we were doing at Mattersey and over the years sent us a good number of excellent students who, after they had returned to Germany to take up pastorates there, invited us to minister for them whenever we were in Germany.

It was also through my contacts with the leadership of Volksmission that I was invited on several occasions to travel round the churches for a couple of weeks often preaching for just one evening in each church. I was usually accompanied by Eileen, who loved travelling with me and enjoying the beautiful scenery of southern Germany and the warm hospitality we received in homes wherever we went.

We undertook such trips in 1998, and 1999, when I was also the guest speaker at the BFP national leaders’ conference. (BFP was the wider Pentecostal movement in Germany of which Volksmission had become a part). We made similar trips in 1994, ’95, and ’96.

But it was the church at Heidenheim that we visited most frequently. The pastor there was Albert Bühler. In the early eighties his son-in-law Jürgen Single had heard about a youth camp we were holding at Mattersey during the summer vacation and asked if he could visit it with a coachload of young people from their church as they were arranging a tour of England. We were delighted to receive them and that was the beginning of a lovely relationship we enjoyed with the Bühler-Single family and the church in Heidenheim.

We also visited Luxembourg on several occasions due to our relationship with John and Ann Leese who, as AoG missionaries, did an amazing job over many years planting a church there. John had been a student at Kenley when I first started teaching there. We first visited them for a weekend with William and Anthea Kay in 1990 and then again for a holiday in ’92 with our daughter Debbie, her husband David, and their one-year-old daughter, Emily, who was our first grandchild. We have visited them many times since including 2001 when John asked me to take care of the preaching (in French, not Luxembourgish) while he and Ann were on holiday.

It's also through our contact with Luxembourg that some of my books were translated into French. I will always be grateful to Caroline Hutin, a French schoolteacher who specialised in English, who spent many hours translating You’d Better Believe It, Body Builders, and Just a Taste of Heaven.

Having these available was very helpful when I was preaching or teaching in French-speaking countries like France and Belgium. I am so grateful to the Lord that people have enjoyed my teaching and have usually wanted to know more. And my books, in whatever language, have made that possible.

My ministry in Belgium was concentrated largely in and around Brussels, at the Continental Theological Seminary where I taught regularly for several years, and at the Christian Centre which held services in both English and French. Daniel Costanza, the pastor of the French speaking church, has used my books as a basis for teaching various courses of Bible study.

Jacques Dernelle, who teaches regular courses at CTS, also pastors a great church in Tubize where I have also had the privilege of teaching and preaching. And on at least two occasions I visited Liège and gave a series of teaching which seemed to be well appreciated by the people there.

In France where we frequently went on holiday we always sought to attend the nearest ADD church on Sunday mornings and I was often asked to preach. I remember preaching in Versailles, Pau, Mourrenx, Clermont-Ferrand, and Toulouse. However, in Embrun they didn’t know who I was and anyway there was already a guest preacher, a French pastor, Samuel Foucart, from Pavilly near Rouen. I enjoyed his preaching and spoke with him afterwards. We exchanged contact details and as a result I was invited in the year 2000 to do a week’s teaching on the Holy Spirit.

Countries I visited only once or twice during this period were Austria, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, and Italy. In 1982 at the invitation of Carl Pocklington we went to Austria for a week and I preached in Villach and Klagenfürt. And in 2000 I taught for a few days in the church in Linz where Eddie Griesfelder was the pastor.

On two occasions I preached for a week in Messina in Sicily where Giuseppe Melusso was the pastor of large AoG church. In 1991 I preached in Reykjavik (Iceland), and in Nokia (Finland) where Teuvo Valkama, one of our former students was the pastor. And in 2002 I preached in Copenhagen (Denmark) and Limerick in Ireland.

I look back on all these experiences with great joy and a profound sense of gratitude to the Lord for the privilege of declaring his word in so many places and to so many people.

Next time we’ll be talking about our service for the Lord beyond Europe.

View Details

My Story Talk 26 Off-campus Activities

Most of what I have said about our years at Mattersey so far has related to what happened on the campus, and that was certainly where we spent most of our time. But our ministry was by no means confined to the campus. It was becoming increasingly international and interdenominational. So in this talk I’ll begin by describing some of my activities within Britain which took place beyond the College campus before proceeding to our travels in Europe and further afield.

Activities within Britain

Apart from my regular preaching in local churches around the country my main activities in Britain during this centred around:

The AoG Executive Council

My relationships with the charismatic renewal

and expanding my writing ministry.

The AoG Executive Council

I have already mentioned some of the positions I had held within AoG before becoming Principal of the Bible College, but in 1984 I was elected to the Executive Council. This was important because it meant that the College had a voice at national level and that I could ensure that the interests of the College were always taken into consideration. And it became even more relevant when in 1987 I became its chairman, a position I held until 2007 when the structure of AoG was radically changed and about which I shall say more in a later talk.

Since its inception in 1924 the final authority in AoG was the General Council which met annually at the General Conference. The role of the Executive was to take responsibility between conferences for promoting and safeguarding the welfare of the Fellowship. It was a great privilege for me to serve alongside respected older brothers like Veyne Austin, Herbert Harrison, Aaron Linford, Keith Monument, Aeron Morgan, Keith Munday, John Phillips, Douglas Quy, and Colin Whittaker, as well as younger men like Paul Newberry, Warwick Shenton, and Paul Weaver, who were all newly appointed at the same time as me.

Each year the Executive Council elected its own chairman to serve for a year and in 1987 I was appointed. These elections were always held by secret ballot, and I was surprised to be reappointed year after year for the next 20 years. This obviously gave me added responsibility especially when it was decided in 1993 to form AoG Inc., which made Executive Council members the sole members of a new charitable company, Assemblies of God Incorporated.

The purpose of the company was to protect AoG churches and ministers from any personal liability for actions taken by AoG. This was felt necessary to avoid any crises like the vast debt that had been incurred by the Overseas Missions Council over a situation that had arisen in Paderborn, the details of which I do not need to go into here. The Board of Directors of this new company was comprised of all members of the Executive Council. As directors we were given financial responsibility for the affairs of the Fellowship with the safeguard that each director was only personally liable up to the value of £1. It also gave us legal power over all the assets of the Fellowship without reference to the Conference.

However, as we were appointed by the General Council by being elected to the Executive Council at the General Conference, we were always aware of our responsibility to abide by the wishes of the Fellowship as a whole. Despite the legal authority we had been given, as a matter of integrity we would never have taken independent action on any major matter without bringing it to Conference. This, as we will see later, was to change in 2007.

My relationship with the Charismatic Renewal

But my ministry in Britain was by no means confined to AoG. I had not grown up in AoG and ever since I heard about the baptism in the Spirit my heart has always been for Christians of other denominations to come into the experience. That had been a major part of my ministry when I had travelled round the universities in the sixties, preaching and laying hands on people to receive the Spirit.

Those were the days when the charismatic renewal was getting under way, and in the seventies, while we were at Basingstoke, I had good fellowship with Barney Coombs, the Spirit-filled pastor of the Baptist Church, who was holding regular ministers’ breakfasts and monthly All Saints Nights for Christians of all denominations to hear about the things of the Spirit.

So when, early in my time at Mattersey I received an invitation from Michael Harper to attend something called the Charismatic Leaders’ Conference at Whirlow Grange near Sheffield, I was pleased to accept. It was at these conferences that I met people like Roger and Faith Forster, David Pawson, Terry Virgo, Colin Urquhart, Gerald Coates and other charismatic leaders.

For several years I was part of the planning committee that organised these conferences some of which were held at Mattersey. I was also a member of committee that planned the International Charismatic Consultation on Worldwide Evangelisation (ICCOWE) held in Brighton in June 1991.

I continued to participate in the conferences throughout and beyond my time at Mattersey, and in fact at the time of writing this I am expecting to attend one this year. I have learnt that, although Pentecostals in Britain have been considerably influenced by charismatics, there is still very much that they can learn from us. For example, I am told by friends and family members that even in flourishing charismatic churches there is still little clear teaching on the baptism in the Spirit and spiritual gifts. But sadly, the same could be said of many Pentecostal churches.

So it became my vision that Mattersey should become more than a college that prepared people to be AoG ministers and missionaries, and we advertised the college as having a distinctly charismatic emphasis. As a result several of our graduates are now doing a great job for God as Anglican, Baptist, or Methodist ministers. It also had the benefit of introducing AoG students at Mattersey to a wider cross-section of the Christian church than just their own denomination.

Expanding my writing ministry

But whether it be in AoG or any other denomination, the fact is that people need teaching. Genuine spiritual experience comes from a correct understanding of biblical truth. That was surely the purpose of a Bible College! And as it is not possible for everyone to come to Bible College, I was determined to make our teaching more readily available to a wider audience. I was able to do this in some measure through articles I contributed to the AoG magazine and Renewal, but in 1998 I had a distinct impression that the Lord wanted me to write more books, using the teaching I was giving at Mattersey as a basis.

That expanding my writing ministry was the way the Lord was leading me was confirmed in a wonderful way by César Castellanos who in 1998 was the guest preacher at our AoG conference in Prestatyn. At the end of a late-night meeting where César had been speaking to the members of our Executive Council and their wives, he prayed for each one of us in turn. When he came to me, instead of praying, he prophesied. His prophecy included the following statement:

This is what the Holy Spirit says: I will greatly anoint your pen and your writing will be a blessing to thousands and thousands of people.

Now that prophecy was remarkable for at least three reasons. Firstly, César did not know me. He had only just met me that evening. Secondly, he knew I was a Christian leader, but he did not know that I was a writer! And thirdly, as I have said, in the weeks leading up to that conference I had been feeling that God wanted me to give more time to writing. César’s prophecy came as a wonderful confirmation.

Since that time I have written several more books, some of which have been translated into at least fifteen different languages. They have certainly reached thousands already. I’m so grateful to the Lord that even while we were still at Mattersey he was still using me to be a blessing beyond Mattersey, not only in the UK but much further afield. But that brings me to my ministry in Europe.

Activities in Europe

In an earlier talk I explained how my ministry in Europe began in the seventies while pastoring the church in Basingstoke. This was as the result of contacts with Willy Droz in Switzerland and George and Warren Flattery, American missionaries working in Belgium. These relationships continued while we were at Mattersey. For several years Eileen and I led teams of students on missions to Switzerland and I had regular contact with the Flatterys through the work with I.C.I., Continental Bible College, and EPTA.

And indeed, most of my work in Europe was related to either:

EPTA, the European Pentecostal Theological Association,

or PEF, The Pentecostal European Fellowship

The European Pentecostal Theological Association

EPTA was formed as a result of the Pentecostal European Conference held in The Hague in August 1978 at which I had been invited to preach. Apart from the main meetings held each morning and evening there were workshops each afternoon for various special interest groups including Bible Colleges. As the recently appointed Principal at Mattersey I was naturally interested to attend these and found them very helpful.

It was good to meet with faculty and staff from other Bible Colleges and share what we were doing and what our hopes for the future were. I found myself wondering if it would be possible for us to meet on an annual basis. The PEC conferences were held every three years, so it was clear that something separate from PEC needed to be organised, and I suggested this while a few of us were chatting after one of the sessions.

As there seemed to be a general agreement about the matter, we decided to look for a suitable venue and dates for the following year. I knew already that the European Pentecostal Fellowship were holding a conference in Vienna in 1979 and suggested that this might be a good time to hold a planning meeting. (EPF and PEC were at that time separate bodies, but a few years later merged to form the Pentecostal European Fellowship, about which I will say more later).

So in 1979 Eileen and I, along with several other AoG personnel, attended the EPF conference in Vienna. The meeting with other Bible College people was not an official part of the conference but was tagged on at the end. However, during the conference itself I was unexpectedly asked by John Wildrianne to be the speaker at one of the sessions, as a brother from France who was scheduled to speak had been unable to come.

The subject was Spiritual Gifts and fortunately I already had plenty of material on that topic and was grateful for the opportunity to speak to leaders from across Europe on a subject that was close to my heart. The talk was well received and, together with my preaching in the Hague the previous year, proved to be the beginning of a much wider ministry in Europe than I had ever expected.

The meeting for Bible College leaders that we had arranged to take place after the conference lasted only a couple of hours but was a good starting point at which it was agreed to call ourselves EPTA, the European Pentecostal Theological Association. At the invitation of the brothers from ICI, we agreed to hold our first conference the following year in Brussels where, in addition to hearing papers on subjects of mutual interest, we would discuss a doctrinal statement for EPTA, conditions of membership and other related matters.

The meeting in Brussels was a great success and was the first of many annual gatherings of college personnel from all over Western Europe. And when Eastern Europe opened up after the destruction of the Berlin Wall in 1989, we were delighted to welcome delegates from those countries too. Over the years conferences were held in England, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Poland, Slovakia, France, and Portugal.

They were times of great blessing. Despite the name, they were not just an opportunity for theological discussion. Their primary purpose was for colleges to help each other by sharing mutual concerns, many of which had little to do with theology! It was good to know that other colleges faced the same problems as you did – practical issues like student discipline, catering, timetable, finance, governance and, something which was a major topic for several years, accreditation.

In addition to all this there were great times of worship and prayer. Working in a Bible College often means facing stressful challenges and faculty and staff found EPTA conferences times of refreshing and spiritual renewal. And they were especially relaxing when we held them during the summer vacations when many combined them with a family holiday. The ones held at Mattersey were particularly popular.

Eileen and I formed great relationships with many of our EPTA friends and trips to EPTA helped forge stronger relationships with our own faculty members too. I well remember the fun we had when we travelled by minibus to Germany with Dave and Beryl Allen and Brian and Audrey Quar, spending a few days relaxing in Switzerland before staying with friends in Heidenheim enabling us to attend the PEF Conference near Stuttgart followed by an EPTA conference in Erzhausen. Much of the blessing we enjoyed at Mattersey sprang from the strength of those relationships.

For many years I served on the planning committee for these conferences. In the days before the internet this necessitated flying to various venues in Europe most of which I enjoyed immensely despite the occasional problem with flights, and the anxiety you experience when you don’t speak the language and the person you’re expecting to pick you up doesn’t arrive! The American brother who was picking me up had mistaken my arrival time at Stuttgart, which was 14.40 as 4.30 in the afternoon! But we learn from these experiences – I know he did – and these trips also gave me opportunity to preach in one of the local churches on Sunday morning before flying back in time for work at Mattersey on Monday.

But possibly the most fruitful result of founding EPTA was the openings it gave me to teach and preach in several of its affiliated colleges. I have taught courses both at bachelors and masters level in Sweden, Finland, Germany, Poland, Denmark, Germany, Portugal, and Ireland.

I made several visits to Sweden where the system was rather different from the other countries I have mentioned. Because of the number of large Pentecostal churches there, there was no national college, but there were several colleges offering full-time courses based in the local church. The church at Gothenburg, for example, when I preached there had a Sunday morning congregation of over 2000 and had a large enough complex to house a full time Bible college.

Stig and Marianne Hedstrom, who led that college, had brought a party of young people to Mattersey and heard me teach on spiritual gifts, told me that they needed this teaching in Sweden and asked me if I would come. On two separate occasions they organised teaching tours for me, the first starting at Gothenburg on the west coast and travelling across to Stockholm on the east. En route I visited colleges in Jonkoping, Linkoping, Mariannelund, and Brommaskolen and Kaggeholme, both in Stockholm. On the second tour about two years later I visited the same places but in reverse order, this time travelling east to west.

Some of the other countries I mentioned, Belgium, Finland and Portugal for example, I also visited more frequently after my time at Mattersey and I will comment on them in a later talk. But what most of them had in common was the fact that my initial contact with each of them came through EPTA. So whether it was the annual conference, or the trips to help plan them, or teaching in some of its member colleges, EPTA was a source of personal enrichment for me, and I will always be grateful to God for the prompting he gave me to suggest it back in the PEC conference in 1978.

Next time – more about PEF and my involvement with the World Pentecostal Conference.

View Details

My Story Talk 25 Our Relationship with the Students

A key to the success of any organisation, whether it be a business, church, school, or college, is the quality of relationship between those who work, worship or study there. St. Paul’s use of the human body as a picture of the church is a great illustration of this principle. Each member of the body is unique and has a different function from the others, but all the members are equally important. Whatever our role, our aim should be to edify others rather than ourselves. And it’s the responsibility of those in leadership to encourage and facilitate the harmony that makes this possible.

As I have already indicated, my relationship with staff and faculty members was, I think, a fairly happy one. Of course, there were times when I got it wrong, but I am sure that the success we enjoyed at Mattersey was due to the favour God granted us by giving us a team who were willing and able to work together in achieving the vision he had given us for the College.

But what about our relationship with the students? This inevitably varied as the college grew, and although I shall be referring mainly to my personal relationship with the students, much of what I say will apply to other members of faculty and, to a greater or lesser extent, to members of staff too. For a body to be healthy, all the members must be in a good working relationship with each other.

And this biblical principle applied to every area of College life. It was expressed in the example we set in our commitment to Christ, in our pastoral care and discipline, in what we taught and how we taught it in the classroom, in our worship and ministry in morning chapel and at church on Sundays, and in our social and recreational activities.

Pastoral Care

Before I became Principal I thought that it would be great to develop a personal relationship with every student, maybe by seeing each of them for about ten minutes each week. But I soon realised that this would be completely unworkable with even as few as the 48 students we had when we started. I also began to understand that not every student would appreciate having to see the Principal once a week! Relationships can’t be forced. They have to develop naturally.

My first contact with the vast majority of students was when they came for their interview after they had applied to come to Mattersey. Some were understandably quite nervous about this, but this was an opportunity for me to reassure them, advise and encourage them. And as many of them came by public transport, either Eileen or I would often pick them up at Retford Station and the ten-minute journey back to Mattersey helped to break the ice and reassure them that we were human!

And, of course, developing any kind of relationship with someone requires at the very least remembering their name. My father had been the headmaster of a Comprehensive School with a thousand boys, and he once told me that he knew the name of every boy in the school. I was fairly sure that such a feat was way beyond my capability, but I did make an effort to remember the names of all our students.

I began by spending the first lecture period I had with first year students asking them one by one to remind me of their names. We did this going round the class two or three times and by then I was usually ready to repeat their names by memory. I’m not really sure how valuable this was, but at least it showed them a basic level of personal interest in them.

A far better way, however, was what we eventually did once our children had moved away from home. We invited all new students, in groups of about a dozen, for a pizza evening at our home, which was on the College campus, and got them to wear a name badge to jog our memories. We played games like Jenga and Twister with them and tried to make them feel at home and to set an example of balancing academic studies and spiritual fervour with taking time to have fun together.

And of course, these were not the only times we had fun with the students. Our annual Christmas concerts, preceded by a traditional Christmas dinner where faculty members served the students, were hilarious times together when we learned things about each other that would never be learnt in the classroom. Which was also true of the occasion I challenged the winner of the student table tennis competition and, to the delight of the students, narrowly lost by two games to one.

But if such activities might not normally be considered as pastoral care, they were certainly helpful in forming relationships, which is surely a prerequisite of pastoral care providing at least some understanding of the person you are caring for. Nevertheless, it goes without saying that these activities were clearly not enough for us to form a significant relationship with students that would last throughout their time with us at Mattersey.

And that’s where we began to realise afresh the value of team ministry. We knew already from pastoral life in church that an individual member might well relate better to one leader rather than another, and it was just the same in College. This was particularly true of the girls, many of whom, quite understandably, related better to Eileen than to me. In fact, so did some of the boys!

As Principal I was ultimately responsible in maintaining discipline in the College which, for some at least, might have inhibited too close a relationship with me. And Eileen as matron was more easily available and did a great job in lending a listening ear, giving wise counsel to all who came to her.

But as the College grew we began to feel the need to provide a facility for pastoral care that was readily available to every student with clear information on how to access it. We began by appointing a personal tutor for every student. This responsibility was shared by every full-time member of faculty and appeared to be successful until it became clear that it wasn’t working for everyone.

Some students did not feel able to share their personal problems with the people who would be marking their academic work, and although the fear that it might affect their grades was in my view unfounded, it was clear that we needed to think again.

What’s more I soon discovered that other Bible Colleges were facing similar problems. I learnt at a meeting of the Association of Bible College Principals that to overcome this problem some colleges were considering appointing chaplains who were not part of the regular teaching faculty to be available to give confidential advice to students and, after discussing the matter with the resident faculty and the Board of Governors, we decided to do the same at Mattersey.

We decided to appoint former students who had both experience in ministry and understood what it was like to be one of our students. Our first chaplain was Roy Turner who did an excellent job for a few years until he left us to train for the Anglican ministry despite my efforts to dissuade him. Roy was followed by Steven Jenkins, another former student, who shared the chaplaincy with his wife Deborah so that the girls could have access to a female chaplain if they so desired.

This arrangement worked well and by no means detracted from the relationship that those of us had who were part of the faculty. Until she retired in 1999 students continued to seek advice from Eileen and other staff members, and there was always the opportunity for faculty to have a chat with students in the lunch break or between lectures. So overall we enjoyed a friendly relationship with our students, but that did not mean that there was never a need for discipline.

Discipline

A happy relationship in any society is dependent on mutual consideration and respect. Jesus taught this when he said:

In everything do to others what you would have them do to you (Matthew 7:12).

When I started as Principal I naively thought that there would be little need for rules. If everyone behaved as mature Christian ladies or gentlemen rules would not be necessary. I soon discovered that I was mistaken! Our students came from such a wide variety of backgrounds. They came from different families, different nations, different cultures. They had very different ideas about what was appropriate behaviour. And when you’re all living under the same roof in a remote country village, there are bound to be problems unless clear guidance is given as to what is acceptable behaviour.

So, as a result, we produced a set of rules which I explained to the students at the beginning of the College year. They covered a range of topics including attendance at chapel, lectures, meals etc., and especially relationships with the opposite sex. (Same sex relationships were rarely an issue in those days). Most of the students accepted these regulations without complaint, but one overseas student refused to do so and chose to leave College immediately.

I had no regrets about this but decided that in future we would send all new students a copy of our rules and say that their acceptance at College was dependent on their agreement to abide by them. This we continued to do throughout my time as Principal. It may have had the disadvantage of giving some students the impression that we were becoming too legalistic, but more mature students realised the line had to be drawn somewhere and that our rules were not unreasonable.

Perhaps the main exception to this was with regard to relationships with the opposite sex. A situation arose early on in my time at Mattersey when one of the girls who had formed a relationship with another student was devastated when the boy suddenly terminated the relationship. She was so upset that she felt unable to return to College to complete her course.

As a result one member of faculty who knew the girl very well suggested that it was time for us to make some ruling that would stop such things happening. This was clearly impossible, but I did realise that we had a responsibility to protect the vulnerable as much as we could. This resulted in a series of regulations including things like not forming a relationship during your first six months at College, informing your personal tutor when a relationship had been formed, and so on.

The fact that we felt the need to vary these regulations over the years in an attempt to improve them shows that none of them were entirely satisfactory and in some cases did more harm than good. Towards the end of my time at Mattersey I apologised to a couple for the distress these regulations had caused them when, in their final year at College, they came to me and confessed that they had formed a secret relationship two years previously and had been feeling guilty about it ever since. I know the fault was partly theirs, but I really wondered if we had made a mistake in the first place by possibly overreacting to the situation I described earlier. And anyway, there’s no point in making a rule if you have no reasonable means of enforcing it.

So, looking back on it, I’m not sure that we always got it right, but right or wrong our motive was always to do what we felt was best for the College community as a whole and I am grateful to all our Senior Students who played a great part in informing me of student opinion and, where necessary, reminding their fellow students of what was expected of them as men and women preparing to serve the Lord Jesus.

Finally, I hope that the way we handled these matters showed the students the importance of discipline and the spirit in which it is exercised. Church leaders in the New Testament were described as both rulers and servants following the example of Christ who, though he was Lord and ruler of all, took upon himself the role of a servant and washed his disciples’ feet. He taught by example, and nothing we say is of any value if it is not backed by the example we set. But that brings me to the subject of teaching.

Teaching

We usually associate the subject of teaching with what goes on in the classroom, and there was certainly plenty of that at Mattersey. There is, of course, less opportunity in the classroom to form relationships with individuals, especially when the class is large and the teaching method is the lecture.

I well remember in my first term at Oxford an Economics lecture attended by over 200 students. In something of a monotone, the lecturer read what he had written and there was no opportunity to ask questions at the end. In those days attendance at lectures was not compulsory and a week later student numbers had diminished considerably.

I stopped going after the third lecture and was not surprised when it was announced on the College noticeboard that the series of lectures had been cancelled ‘due to an indisposition’! Needless to say, my relationship with that lecturer amounted to zero. There were clearly three reasons for this. The lecturer had inadequate communication skills, the class was too large, and there was no opportunity to ask questions.

Fortunately, at Mattersey all our lecturers were able communicators, and although at times our class sizes were larger than ideal, there was usually time for questions. I personally have always preferred to take questions at the end to ensure that I have covered all the material necessary. In fact, very often students who have wanted to ask a question earlier have discovered that the question was answered later in my lecture.

However, at whatever point of the lecture questions are invited, the value in doing so is undeniable. It not only gives the student the opportunity to get clarification on anything they have not understood but also helps the lecturer to understand a little more about the student, their personality, their needs, their aspirations and their concerns. Not to mention their level of intelligence!

And of course, the answer to a question can benefit not only the student who asks it, but potentially the whole class. What’s more, valuable lessons may be learned from the way the question is answered as much as from the answer itself. At a recent EPTA conference I was delighted to meet up with a former College student who told me that although he was grateful for all I had taught him at Mattersey, the most valuable lesson he had learned was from the way in which I had answered a particular question.

He told me that on one occasion another student had asked a ridiculous question at which he and the rest of the class were groaning inwardly. Had he been asked the same question he would have dismissed it very quickly, possibly ridiculing the person who had asked it. Young people, even Christian young people, can be very unkind at times and Mattersey students were no exception. But apparently I had treated the student with respect, as I have always tried to do, despite the stupidity of the question. I confess I was greatly moved to hear this and am reminded that people learn more from our lives than from anything else.

So teaching at Mattersey was by no means confined to the classroom. I had valuable conversations with students when we were travelling together in my car or in the College coach. And of course, there were our Wednesday morning chapel services, which were longer than on other days, and when a member of faculty or a guest speaker would preach. Students could see us in a different mode than in the classroom and I’m sure they were learning, often without realising it from the example we set.

I was once preaching at an EPTA conference in Erzhausen, Germany, when I noticed that Don Smeaton, a colleague from another college, was quietly making comments to a young man beside him. After the meeting he came and apologised in case he had distracted me, but he was giving the young man who was one of his students a lesson in Homiletics using me as a model!

We do learn by watching and that’s why it’s so important that church leaders set a good example in these things, whether it be in preaching, or the exercise of spiritual gifts, or how they pray for people to be healed or receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Students often received the baptism under my ministry, either privately or in the chapel or classroom. And on one occasion a student listened to my teaching, watched me put it into practice in the classroom and, following my example, that evening saw several young people filled with the Spirit as he laid hands on them during the youth meeting.

I am so grateful to God for the great privilege I have had in playing a part in training and preparing so many such people who are now leaders in the church today. It is my sincere prayer that they will train others following the principles I have outlined in this talk. The precise details of how we did are not so important, but the principles taught in God’s word will never change.

Next time: Life beyond the Mattersey Campus

View Details

My Story Talk 24 Developing the curriculum and choosing the faculty

Welcome to Talk 24 where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I was talking about all the improvements we were able to make to the campus at Mattersey. We were, of course, grateful to the Lord for these improvements, especially for the provision of sufficient finances to build the new hall of residence and the beautiful new Chapel and classrooms. But these were never an end in themselves. They were the means to an end. Their purpose was to facilitate the training and education of men and women to understand the Bible and to become more effective servants of the Lord Jesus Christ.

But even more important than the erection of buildings was the development of the curriculum and the choosing of the faculty. And to do that it was first necessary to determine our aims and objectives. What follows is taken from one of our early college prospectuses. If the terminology sounds a little old-fashioned today, please remember that it’s now almost half a century since I first wrote them. The NIV had only just been published and much of our preaching was based on the text of the Authorised Version (KJV) of the Bible.

But even if the language might need updating, I believe that these aims and objectives would still be highly appropriate for any pentecostal or charismatic Bible college today and would form an excellent basis for its curriculum. They should certainly be the goal of every local church!

Aims and Objectives

The general purpose of the college is to train men and women for Christian service at home and overseas. This training involves not only the imparting of a comprehensive theological education but also emphasises the development of Christian character and spiritual growth.

Because the college takes a positive stand for the authority and inspiration of Holy Scripture, its aims are essentially biblical. They may be summarised as follows:

That opportunity might be given to those who are called to the work of the ministry to fulfil the will of Christ that his servants should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach (Mark 3:14).
That through their ministry the gospel might be preached to every creature (Mark 16:15) and that disciples might be made of all nations (Matthew 28:19).
That the gospel might be preached with signs following (Mark 16:20) and the churches be established in the power and demonstration of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:4).
That God's servants might be able always to give a reason for the hope that is in them (1 Peter 3: 15) and to speak the things which become sound doctrine (Titus 2:1).
That God's workmen might be approved unto God, being able rightly to divide the word of God (2 Timothy 2:15) and to contend earnestly for the faith once for all time delivered to the saints (Jude 3).
That God's people might come to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ and that each individual part of his body might so function in its proper order that the church will make edification of itself in love (Ephesians 4:13-16).
That the word of God may be entrusted to faithful men who will be able to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2).
That those who seek to love God with all their heart and soul might also love him with all their mind (Matthew 22:37).
That the gifts and fruit of the Holy Spirit might be manifested in the lives of all God's people (1 Corinthians 12:7-11, Galatians 5:22-23).

10.That the church which is the bride of Christ might be ready and prepared for his coming (Ephesians 5:25-27; 2 Corinthians 11: 2; Revelation 19:9, 21-22).

Developing the curriculum

In using the word curriculum, I am referring to the entire College programme, not just the academic timetable. This included worship in chapel five mornings a week, weekly student prayer groups, days of prayer at least once a term, and church on Sundays with opportunities for students to sing, testify or preach, as invited by the local pastors.

We experienced some wonderful times of blessing, particularly in our Wednesday morning Chapel services, which were longer than on the other days and where the resident faculty and staff were present as well as all the students. It was the spiritual life of the College that provided the inspiration and motivation for the academic discipline of study in the classroom.

But there was, of course, plenty of inspiration in the classroom too. That derived from the quality of our teaching staff – more of which in a moment – and the subject matter of the courses most of which were directly related to the Bible, the inspired word of God. Of course, the structure of the timetable varied over the 27 years I was Principal, but the underlying principles remained the same. What follows is just an example of what we were offering towards the end of my time as Principal. Courses available included:

Certificate in Biblical Studies (One Year)

Diploma in Biblical Studies (Two Years)

BA in Biblical Theology (Three Years)

and for suitable candidates who completed all three years we also awarded our

Diploma in Christian Ministry.

In addition to all this we were also validated to award an

MA in Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies

which was a part-time two-year course. This was much appreciated by people already in church leadership some of whom had no formally recognised theological qualification. This was only possible because we had sufficient faculty members who had earned a Ph.D.

But, without question, our most important course for people who wanted a thorough preparation for Christian ministry was our three-year B.A. in Biblical Theology combined with our Diploma in Christian Ministry. Over the three years these included teaching on the following

YEAR ONE

Bible Survey, Hermeneutics and Homiletics, Evangelism, Care and Counselling, Christian Doctrine, Christian Leadership, Church History Survey, Children’s and Youth Work, Other Faiths, and New Testament Greek. (For those who did not opt for Greek, there were special courses on the English Language, John’s Gospel, and Luke/Acts).

YEAR TWO

O.T. General, N.T. Christian Origins, Early Church History, The Holy Spirit, Mark in Greek, Christian Apologetics, Christian Ethics, 1 Corinthians in English, Romans in English, Anthropology, Hebrew, Media Work, Church Planting.

YEAR THREE

O.T. Theology, N.T. Theology, Pentecostal Distinctives (The Baptism in the Holy Spirit and Divine Healing), History of Revival, Philosophy of Religion, John in Greek, Hebrew Set Texts, Christian Missions, Ecclesiology, Youth Work, Pastoral Training.

But no matter what course we provided, our aims and objectives remained the same throughout. Any qualification gained was never intended as an end in itself. Personally, I saw my own academic qualifications rather like the apostle Paul saw his Roman citizenship. He certainly would not glory in it. It meant nothing compared with the excellency of knowing Christ, but he wasn’t afraid to make use of it when appropriate (Acts 22:25-28).

I knew that the success of the curriculum could only be measured by the extent to which its aims and objectives were being fulfilled in the lives of the students. And that could certainly not be accomplished by academic learning alone. Our students were accepted on this understanding. Any academic achievement they might gain would be a bonus. Their primary motivation must be a sense of calling, a desire to serve Jesus.

Choosing the faculty

And, of course, our biblical aims and objectives so important to the development of our curriculum were equally relevant to the choosing of those who would be teaching its courses. They must not only be in agreement with our AoG Statement of Faith but also be people of experience in the work of God and have a divine anointing to teach. Academic ability in itself was not enough. I had had enough experience at Oxford where some of those teaching no doubt had great academic ability, but whose communication skills left much to be desired!

But of course, however great your ability to communicate, you need to know what you’re talking about! I have listened too often to people with great communication skills preaching absolute nonsense! Even in some national and international conferences! So our choice of faculty was influenced by the need to find people who believed the Bible, were filled with the Spirit, knew their subject, and had a God-given ability to teach it.

And that meant the ability, not to make simple things sound difficult, but to make difficult things easy to understand. I think the greatest compliment I was ever paid about my preaching came from old George Hurt when he said to me,

The thing I like about your preaching, Pastor, is that you never say anything I can’t understand.

And if Eileen were still with us, she would readily confirm that wherever we went people would say the same. I am so grateful to God for that ability. I did not learn it. It was just the way he made me. But not just me. It’s the true evidence of the ministry of every teacher, and I’m so grateful for those the Lord sent to work alongside me endowed with a similar gifting.

I have already mentioned Ernest and Joan Anderson who moved back into pastoral ministry in 1980 and John Carter who died at Mattersey in 1981 and their significant contribution to the life of the College. After their departure I was so pleased that Colin Warner, who had started with us as a visiting lecturer, accepted the invitation to come to us in a full-time capacity as our Director of Studies in 1980 and saddened by his decision to leave us in 1983.

Colin, who is now with the Lord, was a gifted man with great academic ability and did much in those early years to steer us towards a more academic curriculum. His decision to leave arose from a difference of opinion between us and I am aware that I could probably have handled things better. However, I’m glad to record that he went on to a fruitful ministry in the Coventry assembly and as a lecturer at Birmingham Bible Institute. A few years later we also worked happily together on the AoG Executive Council.

David and Beryl Allen joined us in September 1983 and faithfully served the College throughout my principalship, retiring in 2005, a year after me. Beryl taught the first-year English course and as College Librarian did a great job in turning what had previously been little more than a collection of books into a well organised and properly classified library. Towards the end of her time she was assisted by Anne Dyer, who caried on the great work after Beryl retired.

Dave, as he preferred to be called, had, like Beryl, formerly been a schoolteacher before entering the AoG ministry. He taught a variety of subjects including Church History, his knowledge of which never ceased to amaze me. He later became the College Dean, taking the responsibility for matters of discipline. Dave is now with the Lord, but I, along with many generations of Mattersey students, have every reason to be grateful for the massive contribution he and Beryl made to the success of the College.

Colin Hurt also joined us in 1983. Colin and Julia had been AoG missionaries in Malaysia and, on hearing him preach, I instantly recognised a man with an outstanding teaching ministry. Colin had no formal theological qualifications, but, for that matter, neither had I! Julia had received a word from the Lord that I was going to invite him to teach in the College, so when I asked to see him he happily accepted and the served the College full-time from 1983-85 and again, after a few years back on the mission field, from 1988-93. He taught a wide variety of subjects and was greatly appreciated by students and both he and Julia, who assisted Eileen on the domestic side, were great assets to the life of the College.

William and Anthea Kay joined us in 1984. Eileen and I already had a strong relationship with William and Anthea because of the years we spent together in Basingstoke. My only reluctance in inviting them to come to Mattersey was that I wasn’t sure if the Board of Governors would approve. Three things might count against William. He was a personal friend, and the appointment might look like favouritism. He was not an AoG minister, and he had a PhD which might be seen as a negative rather than a positive because of the anti-academic attitude of some of our ministers at the time.

But the Lord encouraged me with a verse in Isaiah which lit up for me as I was praying about William:

I have called him, I will bring him, and he will succeed in his mission.

So I shared my concerns with the Board and was delighted to hear George Forrester, the chairman, say,

Well brothers, I think that if David feels that we should appoint this brother, we should do so

and the Board unanimously agreed.

Anthea ran the College’s Correspondence Course Department for several years and William taught a variety of courses until his departure in 1994 to a post with the University of Wales. But his main contribution to the College was his firsthand knowledge of Higher Education, his personal encouragement to me to do an MTh and then a PhD, and his help in enabling us to get accreditation for our BA in Biblical Theology. He went on to help other Pentecostal colleges across Europe and beyond to gain similar accreditation and did indeed succeed in the mission to which God had called him.

The next member of faculty to join us full-time was Vernon Ralphs who served as Director of Studies from 1986 until his retirement in 2000. Along with those I have already mentioned, Vernon was a key player in helping the College upgrade its academic programme. He also had a clear prophetic edge prophesying in 1986 that within three years the Iron Curtain that divided Eastern Europe from the West would be removed, and it was of course in 1989 that the Berlin Wall was broken down.

Teaching staff who joined us full-time late on included Richard Davis, Glenn Balfour, Andrew Davies, Dave Garrard, and Robin Routledge.

Richard Davis replaced Brian Quar as Bursar but also taught some of our courses after he had completed our MA in Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies. He served the College from 1994 until some time after I retired.

Glenn Balfour and Andrew Davies were both former students who had taken our London BD course back in the eighties. They had gone on to acquire Master’s degrees and eventually PhDs in Theology. They started to lecture part-time in 1994 and in 2000 took up permanent posts with us. They continued to serve well beyond my principalship, Glenn becoming Principal for a short period and Andrew a Professor at Birmingham University.

Dave and Ruth Garrard were Canadians who served as missionaries in Africa. They came to Mattersey in 1996, Ruth working with Eileen on the domestic side, and Dave, who had a PhD relating to Missions, bringing fresh insights on the subject and teaching a variety of other courses too. He was still teaching at Mattersey when I left.

And finally, at about the same time, Robin Routledge joined the faculty. A local Baptist minister with a charismatic experience and a PhD in Old Testament Studies, Robin was a highly valued member of our team and eventually became full-time during Paul Alexander’s time as principal.

But of course the full-time faculty, important as they were, were by no means the only reason for the success of the College. Over the years there were many visiting lecturers, as well as various chaplains, secretaries, cook supervisors, kitchen and domestic staff, gardeners, and maintenance engineers. These all got a mention in my final report to Conference in April 2004 the text of which I will include in a later talk. For now, it is enough to say that I will always be profoundly grateful to all concerned for their contribution, however great or small. As I have often said, We could not have done it without you.

View Details

My Story Talk 23 Improving the College facilities

The Urgent Need for Action

When we arrived at Mattersey it was abundantly obvious to all concerned that, to say the least, the facilities on campus were far from satisfactory. Set in seven acres of beautiful grounds the setting was certainly picturesque, but the old mansion, Mattersey Hall, was in constant need of attention, as were the other two buildings.

Before AoG acquired it, Mattersey Hall had most recently been used as a Preparatory School for young boys. A Memorial Hall had been erected over the road by Mrs. Sowerbutts, the widow of the previous principal, but this was no longer being used as David Powell had thought it too expensive to heat. There was also a building adjacent to the old mansion that had been erected, I think, in the 1930s to provide dormitories for the prep-school boys.

During Powell’s principalship, our male students were housed in these dormitories which were poorly heated – one of them the students called ‘the icebox’ – and another which accommodated ten men who each had a bed, a small wardrobe, and a chair. Another two dorms had no internal access to the toilets and, in the snowy winters Mattersey was experiencing at the time, visiting the toilet at night was a far from pleasant experience.

The conditions for the ladies, though limited, were somewhat better. They were housed in three upstairs rooms in the old mansion. Each room had its own washbasin and provided accommodation for five students, but, as with the men’s dorms, there was no private personal space.

What’s more, the heating system was far from adequate, there were no recreational facilities, and the laundry facilities were a couple of twin-tub washing machines, suitable for a private house, but not for 40-50 students living together for 40 weeks of the year. The classrooms had chairs but no desks. There was no chapel and virtually no library. By contrast, Eileen and I were very grateful for the beautiful new house that was built for us in the College grounds during our first year at Mattersey, but we were naturally very concerned about the conditions for the students.

Needless to say, we dealt with these problems as quickly as we could. The twin-tubs were replaced with two industrial quality washing machines. We made a start on getting the books in the library classified and turned a large hut in the grounds that had been used for storing junk into a games room with facilities for table tennis, darts, and snooker, though I was conscious that in those days some of our pastors would not approve of such things!

But to make the major changes that we really wanted to see meant erecting in the College grounds a hall of residence that would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, and, as I have already pointed out, although the College was officially owned and controlled by AoG, it was not funded by AoG! There were occasional gifts from churches, but these amounted to less than 5% of what was needed to run the College. Apart from that, our only other source of income was what the students paid in fees. And what the students could pay in fees was largely dependent on whether or not they could get a grant from their Local Education Authority (LEA). And that depended on where they lived as grants for courses at colleges like ours were entirely at the discretion of the LEA.

It became clear to me that, if we wanted to be able to pay for the improvements we needed, we would need either to upgrade the standard of our courses so that our students would be more likely to get grants, or to receive a miraculous injection of cash which only the Lord could provide.

In the end it took both. Our finances became much stronger when we finally received validation for degree courses in 1992, but until then any major improvements would only come through faith in God’s ability to supply the need miraculously. And that would require faith – but not just mine. The College was not mine. I knew I would need the full backing of the Board of Governors to go ahead.

The need was obvious to all concerned, but the Board rightly felt that the matter was so big that we should seek the advice and approval of the Executive Council, and at a joint meeting it was decided we should not proceed without the backing of the AoG General Conference. But first we needed to gather sufficient information about the specific cost and details of the project, and my first task was to establish whether to not we would be likely to get planning permission.

The Hall of Residence – a leap of faith

On contacting the Bassetlaw District Council early in 1979, I was delighted to hear that they foresaw no objection to our building and recommended we apply for outline planning permission, and, with the help of Mr Jeffery, a brother recommended by Pastor Eddie Durham who was a member of the Board, outline planning was approved in January 1980.

Meanwhile, Hedley Palmer, another member of the Board recommended that we consider as a builder PJ Whitehurst who had done some excellent work in constructing several of our churches. His representative, Mr John Grice visited the college and, understanding our requirements, recommended that we adopt a rather different plan designed by PJ Whitehurst at a cost of £524,560. This would provide 120 individual study-bedrooms, and a new dining hall and kitchen all under one roof.

The Board met with the Executive Council to discuss this proposal, and it was agreed that we should go ahead subject to the approval of Conference and that as Principal I should write a letter to be countersigned by Keith Munday as General Secretary and sent out ahead of Conference to give time for the delegates to consider the matter and pray about it.

During the debate, as was only to be expected, a wide diversity of views was expressed, ranging from a comment by David Powell, the previous Principal, that he had a grave sense of foreboding about the whole matter to those who were enthusiastically in favour. The difficulty was that there was no money to pay for the project! Perhaps that’s why for me what proved to be the most significant contribution to the debate was what George Parrott said. For him the only important issue was whether I as Principal had heard from God about the matter. And, to be honest, I had to say that I had not, but that did not alter the fact that we desperately needed these new facilities. If God was in it, I was sure that he would provide the money. Finally, the matter was put to the vote and to my relief received the necessary two-thirds majority.

Once the decision was taken, my friend Brian Quar, who was not only a pastor but also a Civil Engineer and a Director of a Design and Construct Contracting Company, wrote to the Board expressing his delight at the decision made at Conference, but also pointing out two areas of concern. He explained these in some detail and recommended an appropriate course of action offering to be of help in any way he could.

As a result, he was coopted onto the Board of Governors for the purposes of the building project and two years later moved to Mattersey to take up the combined roles of College Bursar and Pastor of the AoG church in Mattersey. I will always be grateful to the Lord for sending Brian and Audrey to us. He relieved me of any responsibility of overseeing not only this building project but also the construction of our new chapel and classrooms in 1998. Brian is now with the Lord, but I take this opportunity to express my gratitude for his friendship and help without which much of what was accomplished at Mattersey would not have been possible.

Progress seemed relatively slow over the next few months, but that was probably a good thing because although AoG had voted to go ahead with the project, they had not promised to pay for it! After the vote had been carried by so large a majority, I fully expected the money to come pouring in. But very little came! Everyone seemed to be leaving it to everyone else! As the time for the signing of the contract drew near we still had very little money, and I began to be anxious. Who has to sign the contract? What happens if the money doesn’t come in? Who goes to prison if the money doesn’t come in?!

These were serious questions that were troubling my mind, and I kept remembering George Parrott’s question: David, have you heard from the Lord?

Eventually, in desperation I said to Eileen,

I need to hear from God about this. I’m going to pray all night, and if he doesn’t speak to me, I’m going to phone the Board of Governors and cancel the whole thing.

So I began my night of prayer . After several hours, at around 2am, I began to feel like giving up. God wasn’t speaking and I really didn’t know what to do. I decided to take a break, so I sat down on the settee and picked up a copy of Redemption Tidings magazine.

As I opened it the title on the editorial page struck me forcibly: FAITH. So I began to read. Now if you have ever been in desperate need to hear from God and have been in a meeting where someone has brought a prophetic word which you have known was just for you, you will understand just how I felt as I read that editorial. Every single word of it came as Thus says the Lord to David Petts. I knew that God had spoken. I knew that we were to go ahead. I knelt down by the settee and sobbed into the cushion and asked God to forgive me for my lack of faith . Then I went to bed. From that moment I never doubted that God was behind our building project after all.

But that is not the end of the story. The next morning I went down to the College and walked into the office. Ernest Anderson was standing there and I excitedly told him what had happened.

That’s wonderful, David, he said, I was praying all night too.

I thought it was strange that we had both decided independently to pray all night and I could not imagine why he had decided to do so.

Oh, I said, What were you praying for?

I was praying for the same thing, he replied, I knew that unless you, as the Principal of the College, heard from God, the thing would never happen.

Oh, thank you Ernest, I said, but you could have gone to bed at 2 o’clock!

I immediately telephoned Colin Whittaker, the editor of the magazine.

Colin, I said, you have written the greatest editorial you will ever write,

and I told him what had happened.

Then he told me that he had known when he was writing the editorial that he was writing it for the College, but of course he could not be that explicit in print.

Jesus said that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses (Matthew 18:16) and, although the context in which he said it was not to do with guidance, I knew beyond doubt that this matter was established. I had received faith through hearing a word from God. Over the next year I went around the AoG District Councils telling them how the Lord had spoken to me. People began to be convinced that God was really in this project and at last the money began to come in.

Much of it was gifts from churches, but it sometimes came in rather unusual ways from individuals, like the cheque for £1000 I received through the post with a piece of wedding cake from a couple who had just got married, or like the supermarket bag that was handed to me anonymously containing over £4000 in cash!

It was through the kindness of such people that we were able to get started. There was not enough to complete the whole building, but in September 1981 we were able to complete the shell of the whole building and erect 32 new bedrooms in the first wing. This, of course, was not enough for all 85 students, but it did mean that the 3 ladies’ dorms in the old mansion could be released for other purposes. They were to become an excellent facility for the library which had previously been housed in one of the classrooms, which was far from ideal.

It was not until September 1983, however, that we had sufficient funds to complete the second phase of the building. We now had over 70 bedrooms, which meant that all our residential students could now be accommodated in the new building. There were also a dining room and kitchen and a student common room, which meant that the old kitchen and dining room could now be converted into a student coffee bar and tuck shop.

All this was wonderful, and we really enjoyed our new facilities, but the job was not yet complete, and the next few years were a real test of our faith. The next phase of the building was not complete until 1989 when the first floor of the entire building was eventually finished and two new classrooms were constructed on the ground floor of the final wing. These, however, were converted into 16 bedrooms only two years later when in 1991 the new building was finally as we had originally planned.

Why had it taken so long? Ten years from start to finish! Only God knows, but I was certainly learning important lessons from the experience. Faith for the impossible only comes by hearing a word from God. It is through faith and patience that we inherit God’s promises. And God usually only provides things for us as we need them. We didn’t need the whole building immediately, but by the 1990s we had the facilities we would need for the great increase in the number of students that the Lord knew was coming when the college received validation to provide degree courses and the students were able to get mandatory grants.

More of that next time, but no account of the improvement in college facilities would be complete without mentioning that in 1986 we were able to double the size of the campus by purchasing the seven acre field adjacent to the campus which proved a valuable asset for student recreational activities and for the Summer Praise Bible Weeks we ran for several years. And in 1998 we erected a beautiful, new chapel and classrooms in the college grounds, this time funded by a mortgage because our financial position had become so strong.

So the Lord provided for us in a variety ways, not, as I had originally hoped, through the supernatural provision of half a million pounds right at the start – which, by the way, would be the equivalent of at least five million today – but gradually, as he knew we would need it, through gifts, through the hard work we put in promoting the college and making the need known, through the help and expertise we received free of charge from people who caught the vision, and, as we shall see in the next talk, through our producing a curriculum that was both thoroughly Pentecostal and at the same time was of a high enough academic standard to achieve validation for degree courses that made us more attractive to applicants because of the grants they attracted.

God does provide for our needs, but he does not always do it in the ways we expect or want him to!

Next time: Developing the curriculum and choosing the faculty

View Details

My Story Talk 22 Facing New Challenges

We said goodbye to Basingstoke after a moving farewell weekend at the end of July 1978 and moved to Mattersey with a great sense of excitement and anticipation. We knew without a shadow of a doubt that the Lord was sending us there, but we were also aware that great challenges lay ahead, not just for the College, but for us as a family too.

Challenges for the family

The immediate challenge for the family was that there was nowhere suitable for us to live. The College did not have space to accommodate us for more than a few weeks before the students returned in September and although living in the attic rooms of the old building was fun for a while, it was hardly ideal for a normal family life. But fortunately we knew that the situation would not last for long.

Because I was an only child and, therefore, our children were my parents’ only grandchildren, our moving to Mattersey meant that we were now 250 miles away. Naturally, my parents wanted to be nearer to us than that and decided that they would move to be near us. Some new houses and bungalows were being built in the village, right opposite the College and Mum and Dad decided to buy one of them. However, they had still not sold their bungalow in Dorset.

So to resolve the problem of our accommodation as a family the Board of Governors, with the help of the AoG Property Trust, loaned my parents the purchase price of the new bungalow in Mattersey on the understanding that Eileen, the children and I could live in it until a new house could be built for us in the College grounds. My parents were to repay the interest free loan once they had sold their bungalow.

This arrangement worked very well and for our first year at Mattersey we lived in the bungalow, and in the summer of 1979 had the joy of moving into Koinonia, a new four-bedroomed house which we had had the privilege of helping to design, along with the challenges of overseeing the erection of a new-build property! It was also wonderful to have my parents living closer to us than ever before since we were married.

But housing was not the only challenge facing us as a family during our first year at Mattersey. The children had to adjust to new schools. Deborah was 14 and Sarah 13 and having been used to a Comprehensive School in Basingstoke had now been accepted by the Elizabethan High School in Retford where the curriculum was different and meant that they had quite a bit of catching up to do in some subjects.

Jonathan was just 7 and fortunately there was a primary school in the village, where I think he settled in quite well, although he had to get used to the fact that the other children spoke with a different accent and thought that he was ‘posh’. He once came home and said to Eileen,

Mummy, my friends don’t say ‘something’. They say ‘summat’.

But by and large the children adjusted very well, as also did Eileen who had now become the College Matron. This was not a position she had sought. She had thought that when I became the principal she would just be my wife and lend a hand in the College when she could. However, when, shortly after my appointment, Aaron Linford, the Chairman of the Board of Governors, had asked me,

Will Mrs. Petts be the Matron?

and I had replied that she was not expecting to be employed by the College, he said,

Well, if she becomes the Matron we can pay her.

And that, of course, settled it! It did take time for Eileen to adjust to her new role which entailed heading up the entire domestic side of life at the College, but over the 21 years that she did it she grew in confidence, exercising her authority with kindness and firmness, signing off her memos to students with the letter M, which, I think some of the students understood to stand for Mum rather than Matron. I attribute much of our success at Mattersey to her, though, if she were still with us, I know she would be quick to deny it.

So the move to Mattersey presented challenges to all of us as a family, but there were challenges for me personally too. These included the challenges of new responsibilities, new relationships with the staff and governors, and the expectations that my fellow AoG ministers had of me.

The challenge of new responsibilities

The Principal of the Bible College was appointed by the General Council, meeting at its Annual General Conference. (The General Council, which under God, was the final authority for decision-making in the fellowship, comprised all accredited AoG ministers together with delegates or representatives from churches which had no minister).

The appointment was for two years, and although this was later changed to four, it meant that I was subject to re-election on a regular basis. Like all other Heads of Department in AoG (e.g. Home Missions, Overseas Missions, etc.), as Principal I had to submit an annual report to the Conference and to answer any questions before the vote for re-election took place.

Although this did, I confess, lead to a certain sense of insecurity, it did mean that I knew that I was accountable, and I knew to whom I was accountable. This is vitally important for anyone privileged to hold a position of authority. And the position with which I had been entrusted carried with it a considerable amount of authority and indeed of responsibility.

But that brings me to the more specific details of my responsibilities as principal. These included overseeing the welfare of the students, staff, and faculty, appointing the faculty and planning the curriculum, hiring the staff, interviewing prospective students, maintaining discipline, and promoting the College by advertising in magazines and visiting local churches, and maintaining the College property, buildings and land.

But of course, I was not expected to do all this single-handed. I soon discovered that what the Lord had shown me at Basingstoke about the principles of team leadership in a local church was to be just as relevant to the leadership of the College. Despite all the authority vested in me as principal and the responsibilities that accompanied it, I was very conscious right from the start that I needed the help and advice of those who worked with me.

The challenge of new relationships

When we arrived at Mattersey the key workers at the College were John Carter and Ernest and Joan Anderson. Some of the previous principals on taking up office had seen fit to appoint an entirely new faculty and staff, but this was not something which I was prepared to consider. I felt that I needed the help of those who already had the experience of working at Mattersey and, anyway, asking them to leave would have hardly been fair to them, bearing in mind their faithful service to the College.

John Carter was now in his eighties and living in the College as a resident tutor. He had had a long association with the College, first when his brother Howard was principal when the College was at Hampstead, and later when he himself was the principal at Kenley. For us as a family it was a great pleasure to share meals with this lovely old man in the College dining hall and gain from his wisdom and long experience of serving the Lord. He was always ready to give advice but never offered it unless I asked him for it. He remained as a lecturer at the College until the Lord took him home in 1982 when I had the privilege of officiating at his burial in the cemetery at Mattersey.

Ernest and Joan Anderson and their three children were also living in the College when we arrived. It was clear to me that they had held the College together during David Powell’s principalship by their dedicated hard work. I had got to know them during my monthly visits to lecture at Mattersey and I knew that their continued service at the College would be vital for at least the first few years of my principalship.

Ernest served not only as a lecturer but was also responsible for book-keeping, student ministry and evangelism, and for the upkeep of the seven acres of the grounds and garden. Joan had an incredible capacity for hard work and supervised the catering and cooking and much more. I will always be grateful to the Andersons for the help they gave me while I was finding my feet in my first few years as principal. They had faithfully carried a heavy burden, and I understood why in 1980 they decided to move back into pastoral work.

We had worked happily together but there is always the potential for friction when a new leader takes over, and I’m sure that there must have been areas where they were not entirely happy with my decisions, especially as Ernest had hoped that he might have become the principal and had accepted nomination for it. But the humility and gracious spirit displayed by all concerned meant that any friction there might have been was reduced to a minimum.

And what was true of the staff was also true of the Board of Governors who were also appointed by the General Council and to whom I was required to report every term. I think the support I received from the Board was probably due to three main things. Firstly, it was the Board who had nominated me for the job in the first place. Secondly, in my first year I had shared the principalship with Alfred Missen and Keith Munday, older men who contributed much to the reorganising of the College and from whom I gained a clearer sense of what might be expected of a principal.

And thirdly, in line with the earlier history of the College, there was still a widespread feeling in AoG that the man of God’s choice should be given his head to lead the College as he felt led by the Holy Spirit. The members of the Board did not see it as their role to tell the principal how to run the College, but rather to support, advise, and where necessary warn. And for this I was always grateful, especially when dealing with the occasional disciplinary situation with regard to a student or even a member of staff or faculty.

So the challenge of new responsibilities and new relationships was made easier because of the dedicated help of the governors, faculty, and staff. Without it we could never have achieved what, by the grace of God, we were able to accomplish during the 27 years of my principalship. But perhaps the greatest challenge I faced throughout those years was meeting the expectations of Assemblies of God.

The challenge of the expectations of Assemblies of God

To appreciate fully the reality of that challenge it is essential to understand the variety of expectations held at the time by my fellow ministers. These ranged from those who did not see any need at all for a college to those who saw the urgency of a thorough training, both theological and practical, for those who were called to the important task of Christian ministry.

This tension arises from the fact that as Pentecostals we believe in the power of the Spirit to equip us for service, but we also believe in the authority of Scripture and the importance of understanding the Bible correctly. I remember that when I was first appointed to the Board of Governors, Tom Woods, an elderly pastor, well respected for his proven prophetic gift, approached me and said,

David, I give you this charge, keep the College Pentecostal.

And this, I assured him, was something I fully intended to do. But his comment almost certainly reflected a suspicion of academic learning held by many of the older Pentecostals of that generation.

This was well summarised by Donald Gee, a renowned Pentecostal pioneer and former principal of the College, when, speaking of the beginnings of the college, he wrote:

A movement that embodies such a special testimony to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit has always tended to look askance at even the simplest form of scholastic training.

But he then goes on to acknowledge that

In more mature years the genuine place and value of Bible schools has been generally conceded, and even enthusiastically welcomed, in the Pentecostal Movement [1].

Nevertheless, at least for the opening years of my principalship, I was sometimes challenged by well-meaning ministers who suspected that the direction I was taking was too academic and I’m sure that there are still those who hold that view. But these good people clearly did not know me very well. The Lord who had baptised me in his Spirit had also given me academic ability, and I knew which was the more important! And improving the academic standard by no means prevented us from keeping the College Pentecostal.

In fact, it had always been a Pentecostal college, as indeed it still is. It was started by the Pentecostal Missionary Union in July 1909. It was led by Pentecostal ministers, most notable of whom were Howard Carter (1921-1948) and Donald Gee (1951-1963), both prominent figures in Assemblies of God.

However, although it always had a close relationship with AoG, it was only in 1951that it was given to AoG. Before then, during Howard Carter’s leadership, William Kay informs us that Carter had run his school without a Board of Governors and that:

…though he allowed Assemblies of God representatives to inspect the premises and comment on the doctrinal position of the curriculum, it was always perfectly clear that he had the last word on what was done…

and that it was his wish that

at no stage should the work lose its independence [2].

My purpose in saying this is to point out that for many years the College had run as a separate independent enterprise and although it was now, in the words of the AoG constitution, owned and controlled by Assemblies of God, it was still expected to run its own affairs and to finance itself. For example, the finances of all other AoG departments came under the control of the General Treasurer, but the Bible College employed its own bursar.

So the challenges facing me were not only those of new relationships and new responsibilities, but also the ongoing tension between some Pentecostals and the academic and the dichotomy between what the AoG constitution required of me and the expectations of fellow ministers which were not always in line with that constitution or indeed with what I believed to be the will of God. However, the advice and support of the faculty and the Board of Governors were of great help, and with them behind me I learned to press ahead with what I felt the Lord was saying and leave the consequences with him.

[1] Donald Gee, Wind and Flame, p. 60

[2] William K Kay, Inside Story, p. 208.

View Details

My Story Talk 21 The Rocky Road to Mattersey (1972-78)

Welcome to Talk 21 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I finished my series of talks on the years we spent I Basingstoke by telling you how in January 1972 God clearly told me that we were going to live at the Bible College. This didn’t happen until 1978 when I was appointed principal of the College which by then had moved from Kenley to Mattersey. Today’s talk will cover some of difficulties we faced on the way and how the Lord eventually brought us through.

In December 1972, after he had served only two years as the Principal at Kenley, George Jeffreys Williamson suffered a heart attack, probably as a result of over-work combined with an accusation that was made against him by one of the students, and shortly after this the Board of Governors reluctantly accepted his resignation. Meanwhile, as there was no resident tutor at the time due to the departure of John Phillips, the Board asked some of the visiting lecturers, including me, to spend a few days at the college encouraging and taking care of the students.

While I was there, Eric Dando, a member of the AoG Executive Council, asked me confidentially if I had ever thought of becoming the principal. This was not a complete surprise to me because of what the Lord had shown me earlier that year about living at the College, but at that stage I had not thought that I might be the principal. And I had never told anyone except Eileen about it.

So I asked Eric why he was asking that question. He told me that it looked likely that Williamson would sadly be resigning and he felt that I might be a suitable person to take over. Although I felt that at the age of 33 I was possibly too young to be appointed to such a responsible position, I shared with him how the Lord had spoken to me back in January.

The months that followed were something of a rollercoaster as Eileen and I lived with the tension that we all experience in times of uncertainty. We knew that the Lord had called us to the college, but was it his plan that I should be the principal? And was it to happen yet? All we could do was hang on to what God had shown us and rest in the certainty that whatever happens God is always in control.

As it turned out, because a new principal could not be appointed until the General Conference the following May, the Board of Governors asked David Powell, the pastor of the Rotherham Assembly, to take care of the College until then. Meanwhile I was waiting to see if I would be nominated. Apart from Eric Dando, Arnold Shaw from Bracknell and Pastor Appleby from Reading had also expressed their confidence in me, but although individuals could make suggestions, nominations would only be accepted which had the support of at least one official council. And when Pastor Appleby suggested my name in a District Council meeting, the chairman, Billy Richards, said,

In a few years, perhaps,

which was to prove to be prophetic. I was encouraged by this, as Richards was, like Dando, a member of the Executive Council and a man I highly respected, and it was evident that he did see the potential in me but felt that now was not the right time, which confirmed what I had already suspected. It was clear that I would not yet be leaving Basingstoke, but that the Lord would fulfil his purpose for me at the proper time, and I had peace about that.

That is until the unprecedented events that took place in May at the General Conference! Immediately before the vote was to take place to determine which of the men who had been nominated would be the next principal, there was a prophetic word saying that the man God had chosen knew who he was and that he should come forward and declare it! This threw the conference into confusion as it was completely contrary to the normal democratic process practised at conference.

The Chairman had to make a decision. The prophecy had to be judged. He conferred with the Executive Council. The matter was put to the conference, and it was agreed to proceed in line with the prophecy. The man whom God had chosen knew who he was, and he should come forward and declare it. Was I the man? The problem was, I knew I was called to the college, but the Lord had never told me that I would ever be the principal.

But while I was still churning these things over in my mind, David Powell, one of those who had been nominated, walked forward and told conference why he felt he was the man. I need to say, in passing, how unfair this procedure was to the two other nominees, one of whom, Clifford Rees, was not present because he was speaking at a meeting in another part of the conference. He told me afterwards that he would not have accepted nomination if he had not felt that he was the man.

After Powell had made his statement the chairman gave opportunity for people to make comments or to ask questions, and one of those who came forward was my old pastor, Alfred Webb. His way back to his seat went right by me and I decided to ask his advice. A few months previously I had confidentially shared with him how I felt God had called me to the college, and so I quietly asked him if he felt I should share it with the conference. His reply was,

Yes, it could be a B that leads to an A.

So that is how I came to tell the entire conference, explaining that I had not come forward before as I could not claim that God had called me to be the principal, but that I did know that God had told me I would live at the college, and that if Brother Powell were elected, and felt it were appropriate, I would be willing to serve under him.

That day Powell was appointed having received the required two-thirds majority vote of the conference, and a day or so later, when I had heard nothing from him, I approached him and said that I hoped he did not mind what I had said, to which he replied,

My heart is with you I this matter, brother. Wait and see what happens.

So I waited, and soon I discovered that he had appointed someone else to work with him. It was weeks later, however, before I received a letter from him saying that he would be happy for me to continue as a visiting lecturer teaching the same subjects as before. In fact, I was the only member of the old faculty who was invited to do so. I decided to accept even though my visits were to be monthly rather than fortnightly due to the fact that the college had now moved to Mattersey, some 200 miles north of Basingstoke, much further from home than Kenley had been.

During the four years that David Powell was the principal, the college was facing considerable difficulties due to the fact that only part of the property at Kenley had been sold and there were insufficient funds to refurbish and develop the property at Mattersey. This was very evident each time I visited the college as a lecturer and, from 1976 onwards, as a member of the Board of Governors. And although these problems were not of Powell’s making, it was also very clear to me that there were administrative issues that could easily be rectified without incurring any additional expenditure.

As a result my desire to be more fully involved in the work of the college was increasing steadily, but at the time there seemed little likelihood of this happening soon. But then, quite unexpectedly, in January 1977 Powell informed the Board of Governors that he had decided not to stand for re-election at General Conference. (At that time all heads of department were subject to re-election every two years). So the other members of the Board agreed unanimously to nominate me.

But when the news was out that Powell was not standing for re-election I was not surprised to discover that two others had accepted nomination from different councils. There was of course no guarantee that I would be elected especially bearing in mind the confusion that had arisen at the time of Powell’s appointment, but I was nevertheless quietly optimistic that this might be the year when the Lord’s word to me would be fulfilled.

However, shortly before the conference we received the staggering news that Powell had changed his mind! He was going to stand for re-election after all. This was, to say the least, administratively inconvenient, and was not a little nerve-racking for me, but I was reassured by the Board of Governors that they would in no way withdraw their support for my nomination.

But that was by no means the end to Powell’s vacillating behaviour. On the first day of conference, he announced that he was withdrawing his name from the list of nominees. Once again the entire conference was thrown into confusion. As a result, when the vote was taken, none of the candidates received the required two-thirds majority and the appointment of the principal was placed in the hands of the Board of Governors and the Executive Council.

A few weeks later, at a meeting where I was of course present as a member of the Board, various names, including mine were suggested and voted on by secret ballot, but none of us received the necessary two-thirds majority. So what next?

It was finally decided to defer the appointment until the 1978 conference and meanwhile to appoint for the next year a team of three principals each of whom would serve for a term at the college but who would throughout the year be jointly responsible for the college.

This was sometimes referred to later as the year of the three principals and, crazy as it may sound, turned out to be a blessing in disguise as I was appointed to serve for that year along with Alfred Missen and Keith Munday and benefitted greatly from their wisdom and greater experience in ministry as we made decisions together about the curriculum, the members of faculty, the timetable for the year, rules for students, and so on.

I agreed to take the first term and, with the exception of the two weeks I was at camp in the New Forest, was resident in Mattersey from the end of July until Christmas, going home only for occasional weekends to see the family. The other weekends I was away on ministry, often with some of the students promoting the college. It was on one of these occasions that I went with about 50 of our students to Newport in South Wales. There was a big inter-church meeting on the Saturday night and on the Sunday the students went to different churches to sing, testify, and preach. I stayed in Newport to preach in the church there.

After Sunday lunch the pastor, Eric Dando, asked me if I would like to phone Eileen, which of course I was grateful to do. After telling her that the weekend was going well, I asked her how she was and was shocked to hear her reply.

I’m O.K., but I very nearly wasn’t!

Oh! What’s happened? I replied.

She told me that there had been a women’s missionary meeting in London and that she and several of the ladies from the church in Basingstoke had gone to it. They had travelled in two cars and on the way home, on the road between Reading and Basingstoke, several horses ran into the road in front of the cars. It seems that they had escaped from a nearby field.

One of the horses collided with the car in which Eileen was travelling in the front passenger seat. The impact was so great that the front of the car roof caved in, to within an inch of Eileen’s head. The car was a complete write-off and, as the people from the car in front walked back to see exactly what had happened, they feared the worst.

At this point it is important to explain that at that time the wearing of seat-belts was not compulsory in the U.K. and the car in which Eileen was travelling didn’t have any. Bearing in mind the speed at which the car had been travelling when it collided with the horse, both Eileen and the driver should have been thrown forward through the windscreen. Indeed, the woman seated behind Eileen was thrown forward so violently into the back of Eileen’s seat that it was twisted out of position.

Yet Eileen was not thrown forward, and none of those travelling in that car was seriously injured. They all walked away relatively unharmed. Eileen told me that throughout the whole incident she was strangely conscious of something – or someone? – holding her to the back of her seat, preventing her from being thrown forward.

Was it a coincidence that on that very evening I had been preaching in Newport on a subject I have rarely preached on before or since? My subject was ANGELS.

On another such occasion we took a bus-load of about 45 students to Bethshan Tabernacle in Manchester. There were several hundred people in the meeting during which the students sang and testified and I preached. As soon as I had finished preaching , an Irish woman near to the back of the meeting began to speak in tongues.

As I was still at the microphone, it seemed right for me to interpret so that everyone present would hear and understand what had been said. So I spoke out in faith trusting that God would give me the right interpretation for what had been said in tongues. When I had finished, we sang a hymn and the pastor closed the meeting in prayer.

As soon as the meeting was over, one of our students, Guetawende Roamba from Burkina Faso, rushed up to me. He was clearly very excited, and when I asked him what was the matter, he told me that the woman who had spoken in tongues had been speaking his native language. Now in Burkina Faso they speak French, and because I speak French, I knew that she had not been speaking French. So I wondered what language it might be.

What language? I asked.

Moré, he replied. It’s our native African language. Only the educated people speak French as well.

Frankly, at that time I had never heard of Moré – and we found out later that the Irish lady who had spoken in tongues had never heard of it either! But I was excited that I had been present when speaking in tongues had been recognised as a real language. At the same time, I was not a little concerned because I was the one who had given the interpretation!

As I mentioned in an earlier talk, I had been interpreting tongues since 1960 when I was a student at Oxford, but it had always been (as it always must be) ‘by faith ’, and I had no certain evidence that the gift was genuine. I had simply trusted the promise of Jesus that God gives good gifts to those who ask him (Matthew 7:11), but it’s easy to imagine how embarrassed I would have been if I had ‘got it wrong’ in the presence of one of my Bible College students! I hardly dared ask the question, but I knew I had to.

And what about the interpretation, Gueta? Was it accurate?

And of course, it was. I wouldn’t be telling this story if the interpretation had been wrong! What an amazing thing! The Holy Spirit inspired an Irish woman to speak an African language which she had never heard, or even heard of, and then gave the interpretation to an English man who had never heard of it either!

So exciting things were happening during the term I spent at Mattersey. The Lord was certainly encouraging us, but in the light of all that had happened at previous conferences I knew there was no guarantee that my position as principal would become permanent. Friends like Paul Newberry and Henry Drabble had told me they thought I would never be appointed as principal. My Oxford MA would count against me! And towards the end of the term there was to be a special conference at Mattersey to debate whether AoG really needed a Bible College!

What’s more, humanly speaking my financial position was far from secure. Keith Davidson, one of the elders at Basingstoke had given up his secular employment to give himself full-time to the work of the church, but had exhausted his savings, so I had told the church to pay him instead of me as I felt that the Lord might soon be moving me on.

These were the kind of things that were occupying my thinking until, during the New Year Convention in Denton at which I was preaching, I finally came to the conclusion that nothing really mattered except for the fact that Jesus died for me. I gave it all to him. And he did meet all our financial needs that year, although I had no guaranteed income, and in the 1978 conference I was finally appointed as Principal of Mattersey Hall Bible College.

View Details

My Story Talk 20 Ministry at Basingstoke 1968-78 Part 5

Welcome to Talk 20 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I was telling you how God was clearly blessing my trips abroad, to Switzeralnd, France, Belgium and the USA, and, thanks entirely to the gift that God had given me, my teaching was in increasingly great demand both at home and overseas. But how did all this fit in with my responsibilities as the pastor of the church in Basingstoke? The Lord showed me that the answer lay in two things – writing and team ministry.

Writing ministry

Today, of course, it’s relatively easy to communicate with people all over the world by a variety of options available through the internet. But before the internet, apart from radio and television, speaking on which was not readily available, Christian literature was the main means of communicating with potentially thousands of people. What you write can travel further than you can.

One example of this was Andy Anstey, a Canadian who became a student at Mattersey during the early years of my principalship. He told me that he had been baptised in the Spirit in a university library in Canada as a result of reading my book, The Dynamic Difference. I have never been to Canada, but one of my books had found its way there.

It had started as a booklet I wrote for the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship in 1971, Be Filled with the Spirit. Jim Hall had used it on my first trip to Illinois and persuaded me to expand it, as a result of which Receive Power was published in 1974 in time for my second trip to the States. It was finally published in 1978 by Gospel Publishing House, Springfield MO, under the title, The Dynamic Difference.

I was also writing articles for magazines like Redemption Tidings and Youth Aflame, the AoG youth magazine. At Basingstoke I had given a series of Bible studies on the Fundamental Truths of Assemblies of God, and I asked Vernon Ralphs, the editor of Youth Aflame, if he would like me to write a series of articles on the subject. Those articles were eventually published by Peniel Press as a book under the title, Know the Truth, in 1976, and with the cooperation of the publisher, I was able to give a free copy to every AoG minister at the General Conference that year.

And something similar happened with another series of articles I wrote for Youth Aflame. At Colchester I had duplicated a series of short talks for young people who had just given their lives to Jesus and these were eventually published as a book in 1977 under the title How to Live for Jesus. Both these books are still being used, over fifty years later, by a number of churches today, though Know the Truth is now published under the title You’d Better Believe It. It has been translated into several languages including German, French, Italian, Finnish, Spanish, Urdu, and Nepalese.

Another publication that is still being used widely around the world is the distance learning course I wrote on the Major Prophets for the International Correspondence Institute in Brussels under the title Themes from the Prophets. I have already mentioned that this was a subject I was lecturing on in Kenley Bible College and I already had many pages of lecture notes that I had produced and duplicated for the students.

So when Dr George Flattery, the brother of Warren and founder and director of ICI, asked me if I would be willing to write the course, I was happy to do so. This involved several visits to Brussels, each of which lasted for two weeks, where I could get on with writing the course undistracted. It was also a great opportunity to meet other Pentecostal educators from around the world, including the renowned New Testament scholar, Professor Gordon Fee who was writing the course on 1 Corinthians and became a good friend.

So I will always be grateful for the opportunity I was given to be a part of ICI, but especially for the induction teaching they offered to all their course writers, which included the requirement to read The Art of Readable Writing by Rudolf Flesch the basic message of which, as I remember it, was to write as you speak, rather than writing in the academic style you were required to use at school or university.

Other things Flesch recommended were, wherever possible, to use short words rather than long ones, personal names rather than pronouns, the active voice rather than the passive, and short sentences rather than long ones – which prompts me to close this sentence before it gets any longer!

So, to summarise, I had realised that by using literature a person’s ministry could be extended far beyond their time and ability to travel. But that in itself did not solve the problem of reconciling what I perceived to be my obligations to the church where I was pastor with the travelling ministry the Lord was clearly opening up for me.

And, as I was praying about this, he answered my question by whispering into my heart the word Antioch. Of course, I knew that Antioch was the place where the disciples were first called Christians (Acts 11:26), but at first I couldn’t see how it was relevant to my problem, so I decided to turn to Acts to see if I could find the answer. And I did. The answer was the development of team ministry.

Developing Team Ministry

The church at Antioch was started by believers who had been scattered as a result of the persecution of the church that took place after the stoning of Stephen. Some of them went to Antioch spreading the word to both Jews and gentiles and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord. When the apostles at Jerusalem heard about this they sent Barnabas to take care of the work, and even more people became Christians. Realising that he needed help, he went to Tarsus to find Paul and brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught great numbers of people.

From this it is clear that they were both, to say the least, key people in the church. And yet in Acts 13 we are told that the Holy Spirit sent them away from the church for a time in order to pioneer churches in other countries. The reason they were able to do this and, on their return, find that the church was still strong, was because they were not the only leaders in the church. Acts 13:1 talks of three others at Antioch who were prophets and teachers.

As I read about this it became obvious to me that this was the Lord's answer to my question. If I was to continue travelling we would need other leaders in the church. So I started on a detailed study of what the New Testament has to say about the leadership of the local church, and I discovered that churches were led by a team of elders, overseers, or pastors, and as I investigated the passages where these are mentioned I saw very clearly that these were all interchangeable terms. In the New Testament the elders were the pastors. They were the ones who were the shepherds of the flock and had the responsibility of watching over, or overseeing it.

I have gone into this in detail in my book, Body Builders, and so there is no need to repeat it here. All I need to say is that I came to the conclusion that the traditional system of having just one person as the church leader really has no biblical basis and that team leadership must be the way forward.

I have already mentioned how the pastor in East Saint Louis had come to the same conclusion and it soon became apparent that this was something the Lord was saying to many different leaders around the world. I preached on this in the Home Missions Conference at Weymouth in 1973 and was pleasantly surprised that I was not the only one to hold this view.

But where were these new leaders for our church in Basingstoke to come from? The answer was simple. We already had them, but they had never been recognised. There were two men, David Moncaster and Keith Davidson, who, I felt, both met the biblical qualifications mentioned in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. But before I asked the church to appoint them, I spent several weeks teaching about the principles of church leadership. If we are going to persuade people to break away from long held traditions it is vital that we show them very clearly that what we are proposing is in line with scripture.

I have already mentioned that Bill Mitchell had already been recognised as an elder in the church before I came. But after my teaching on the biblical qualifications of elders he graciously came to me and said that in the light of what I had taught he thought he was probably a deacon rather than an elder and offered to resign. I told him that I thought he was probably right, but that, as his resignation might be misunderstood by some of the members, I would prefer him to remain as an elder, nominally at least, as long as we both understood that this was not really his role. And to this he readily agreed.

So for the final few years of my time in Basingstoke the church was led by a team which we referred to as the pastoral oversight, Willaim Kay being added to the team a little later. The church continued to grow under this system of leadership, and when the Lord moved me on to Mattersey the church was in safe hands.

The call to the Bible College

I have already mentioned that in 1970 I started as a visiting lecturer at Kenley Bible College. On one of my visits in January 1972 I learned that John Phillips, who was a full time residential tutor at Kenley would be leaving, and as I was travelling home that evening, I was wondering who might be chosen to replace him. It would surely be someone who was already teaching at the college and I was thinking through the names in the college prospectus when I came to my own name. But I quickly dismissed the thought as I was sure that I would be considered too young for such a responsible position. And anyway, God had called me to build a big church in Basingstoke, hadn't he?

But no sooner had I thought this than I felt a check in my spirit and said,

But of course, Lord, I'll do whatever you want me to do. But if you ever do want me to leave Basingstoke I will need very clear guidance on the matter.

You may remember the struggle I had when we first moved to Basingstoke and how for some months I wondered if we had done the right thing. I didn't want a repetition of that. But now, having prayed that prayer, I tried to put the matter out of my mind. This turned out to be harder than expected and that very night, some time between 1:00 and 2:00, on Tuesday 25th January, I woke up with a burning conviction that I was going to live at the Bible College.

I tried to shake it off, but it would not go away, so I went downstairs to pray. What I said to the Lord went something like this:

Lord, you know I need my sleep, so if this is of you, and you want me to go to the college, would you please tell me quickly?

And he did! As I opened my King James Bible, it fell open at 2 Chronicles 34:22. I could hardly believe my eyes. It contained the words dwelt… at the college. With the exception of the parallel verse in 2 Kings 22:14, this is the only reference to the word college in the whole Bible. This had to be more than coincidence.

I had asked the Lord to tell me quickly, and he did. But, rather like Moses in Exodus 3 and 4, I found myself making excuses like, I’ve only been in Basingstoke for four years, and, They wouldn’t choose me. I’m too young. I don’t have enough experience etc. But just as God had an answer for every objection Moses made, he had an answer for mine too. For each objection I made he led me directly to a Bible passage that answered it.

As a result I was entirely convinced that I was going to live at the College. I didn’t know when but thought that it might be in September after John Phillips had left. In fact it was five or six years later! I have discovered that one of the hardest things in understanding the will of God is his timing. I have also discovered that God seems to give us the clearest guidance when he knows that there is trouble ahead! It’s only the certainty that we are in his will that will sustain us through trials and difficulties and tests to our faith.

And there were to be plenty of those before we got to Mattersey! But that’s something for our next talk.

View Details

My Story Talk 19 Ministry in Basingstoke 1968-78 Part 4

Welcome to Talk 19 in our series where I am reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Today I’ll be talking about how, while I was at Basingstoke, the Lord started to open up a wider ministry overseas.

It all began when early in 1971 Willy Droz, a pastor from Switzerland appeared on my doorstep and introduced himself. He had trained at the International Bible Training Institute in Sussex where he had met his wife Brenda. He knew about me through the SPF newsletter which reported details of my travels around the universities preaching on the baptism in the Holy Spirit. He was organising a youth weekend retreat at les Rasses in the Swiss Jura mountains and asked if I would be the main speaker.

I had not been to Switzerland since my first visit in 1958 when I heard about the baptism in the Spirit from Laurie Dixon, and I eagerly accepted the invitation. But I first made sure that they would not expect me to preach in French. There are no less than four different languages spoken in Switzerland, German, French, Italian, and Romansh (spoken only by a small minority). Les Rasses is in the French-speaking area, known also as La Suisse Romande.

It was fifteen years since I had taken my French A level and I had forgotten, or thought I had forgotten, all of it. So I was grateful for the assurance that my preaching would be interpreted, which was a particularly interesting experience as I was at least familiar with the language into which I was being interpreted. In some ways it’s much easier when you don’t know the language and just have to trust the interpreter, but, when you know the language, you’re constantly checking to make sure the interpreter is getting it right! And on one occasion I surprised everyone by saying,

Non, je n’ai pas dit cela – No, I didn’t say that.

So the French I had learnt at school had not entirely deserted me, but I have to confess that, when I was introduced to the wife of the pastor from Geneva, I could not even remember how to say, I’m pleased to meet you. It was only when in La Chaux-de-Fonds they lodged me for a few days with an elderly woman who spoke no English, that I was compelled to speak French and found the language coming back to me.

But I was far from ready to start preaching in French. The opportunity to do so came three years later in March 1974 as the result of my meeting Jerry Sandidge at an SPF house party at Capel, then the home of the Elim Bible College. Jerry told me he was the director for University Action in Eurasia for the American Assemblies of God, had heard about my ministry in Britain and the USA – about which, more later – and invited me to preach in the University of Louvain (or Leuven) in Belgium on the subject, Charismatic Gifts – are they for today?

He also said that he could arrange for me to speak at CBC, the Continental Bible College, later to become the Continental Theological Seminary, near Brussels, where they had two language streams, one in English and the other in French. It was there, I think, that I first met Warren Flattery, who asked if I would mind taking one of his French classes.

In French? I asked.

Oh no, he said, I always do it in English.

To which I responded by politely asking how long he had been living in a French speaking country, and didn’t he think he ought to be doing it in French? And so I asked him for a French Bible and, as I had a day or so to prepare for it, after apologising to the class up front for the mistakes I was sure to make, I somehow managed to preach my first sermon in French. At the end of which the class applauded and Warren said,

Lui, s’il peut le faire, moi, je peux le faire!

If he can do it, I can do it!

And the class applauded again, and from then on Warren took all his classes in French. In my case, the applause was certainly not for the quality of my French, but, I suspect, was an expression of sympathy and appreciation that I had made the effort.

The next opportunity came in 1977 as a result of my meeting Marie-France, a French student at Mattersey. The Bible College had moved in 1973 from Kenley to Mattersey and in 1976, in the final week of the summer term, I was giving a lecture when I happened to mention that on one occasion in Switzerland I had spoken to someone in French. Marie-France approached me afterwards, pleased to know that there was someone she could speak to in her own language.

The outcome of that conversation was that over the next few years Marie-France came to stay with us in Basingstoke on several occasions. She became a good friend of our family and a great help to me in improving my spoken French. Several of my sermons had been recorded on cassettes and Eileen had patiently typed them up, word for word as I had preached them. Marie-France kindly offered to translate them for me, so that I could refer to them whenever I might need to preach in French.

The following year, having heard about me from Marie-France, the pastor of her church in Paris invited me to preach whenever I would next be on the continent. So while I was in Brussels for a fortnight writing a course for ICI (International Correspondence Institute, later to become Global University) – more of which later – I travelled to Paris for the weekend and preached one of the sermons Marie-France had translated for me. The French, of course, was excellent, but I can’t say the same about the delivery! I was so nervous that I read every word of it!

And I did the same the following year when Willy Droz arranged for me to preach in several churches in Switzerland – Vevey, Ste. Croix, Payerne, Lausanne, Saxon, Colenberg, Neuveville, Couvet. I think it was in Vevey that some people came up to me after the service and, after chatting with me, in French of course, for about twenty minutes said,

Thank you for your message. It was very good. But why did you read it all?

To which I replied that someone had translated it for me and that I did not have enough confidence in my French to do it without reading it. But they replied,

You’ve been speaking with us in perfectly good French for the last 20 minutes. You should trust in the Lord.

And I can hardly believe that I made the following stupid reply,

Yes, I know how to trust the Lord in English, but I don’t know how to trust him in French!

But the time did come when occasionally I would have to trust the Lord to help me preach in French without notes, but that’s a story for a later talk. It’s time now to mention the trips I made to the USA while we were still in Basingstoke.

I have already mentioned John Miles who was my closest friend while we were at Oxford. He was part of that group of Pentecostal students who very much took the initiative in the formation of the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship. After graduating John spent a year or so school teaching in England before going to the Congo as a missionary. It was there he met and married Sara, an American missionary and where their first child Julia was born. By 1972 they were back in the USA where John did a PhD in French at the University of Illinois and eventually became Professor of French at Wheaton College.

However, at one point they were thinking of returning to Congo and in 1972 John wrote to me saying that, if I was thinking of visiting them in the States, I should do so fairly soon. His letter coincided with one of my regular visits to Kenley Bible College where I met Don Mallough, a guest lecturer from America who, over lunch, asked me if I had ever visited the States and encouraged me to go if I had the opportunity.

In those days travelling to the States was far less common than it is today, and to me the decision to go there was far from easy. However, I was talking to Eric Dando, a well-known preacher and member of the AoG Executive Council and asked him what he thought. His reply went something like this:

Well, David, I go to America like I go anywhere else. If I feel that I can be a blessing to them and they can be a blessing to me, I go.

That put things in perspective for me and on that basis I decided to go, even though at the time I had received no specific invitation to minister anywhere. So I arranged to go for the month of October, and shortly after received an unexpected letter. It was from Jim Hall who had heard about the work I was doing for the SPF in the universities in Britain and asked if I would do something similar in Illinois where he was the Assemblies of God Director for University Action.

So that’s what I did. Jim arranged preaching engagements for me in churches morning and evening every Sunday and on Wednesday evenings. An offering was taken in each meeting, half of which was designated for the University Action department, the other half for me, to cover the cost of my airfares and a gift for my ministry. This was a complete surprise for me as I had decided to go to the States before I knew of this.

It was also a wonderful answer to prayer. We had been struggling financially as the church was not yet able to pay me an adequate salary and any funds we originally had as the result of the sale of our bungalow in Colchester had now run out. But now our needs were met, and I came home with a renewed faith and expectation that God would always find a way to meet our financial needs.

But the most satisfying thing about the trip was not the financial reward but the response I received in the churches and universities. I was based at Urbana with John and Sara, and I preached there the first Sunday morning I was there. I preached on repentance and was amazed to see how many people came forward in response to the appeal. I received a similar response everywhere I went, and I quickly learnt how different Americans are from us Brits in responding to an appeal.

But for most of the month I was travelling around the state of Illinois accompanied by Jim Hall who acted as my chauffeur and guide and was a great encouragement to me. We learned a lot from each other over the many miles we travelled together and became great friends. We visited eight universities altogether, spending two days in each. These were:

Illinois State University, Normal; University of Illinois, Urbana; Northwestern University, Evanston; Northern Illinois University, DeKalb; Western Illinois University, Macomb; Southern Illinois University Edwardsville; Southern Illinois University, Carbondale; and Eastern Illinois University, Charleston.

Over the course of the three weeks we were touring, dozens of students were baptised in the Spirit and began to speak in tongues, one professor telling me how grateful he was to God ‘for the wisdom he had given’ me in the way I taught the Word and how I prayed for people to receive. And Jim Hall was so encouraged that he sent a report about my ministry to Aaron Linford, the editor of Redemption Tidings, which was published shortly after I returned to England.

I made a similar trip to Illinois two years later in October 74, visiting the same universities, but this time speaking on two main themes, The fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and The Christan’s Armour (Ephesians 6:10-20). On each of these trips I had left Eileen and the children back in England and we all missed each other very much. For Eileen it was particularly difficult as in 1972 Jonathan was only two, and the girls were just seven and eight.

One example of this was when I returned at the end of October 72 and Eileen had driven up to Heathrow with the kids to meet me. During my trip people had asked me about the weather in England and if it was very foggy – I think they must have been watching some of the Sherlock Holmes movies – and I had replied that we occasionally get a bit of fog, but not very much. But ironically, when our flight approached Heathrow, the captain announced that our landing would be delayed because of fog. The delay was so long that we had to go back to Shannon in Ireland to refuel and we eventually landed at Heathrow four and a half hours later than scheduled. And all this time Eileen was waiting with three young children in a very crowded Heathrow.

But the third time I went to the States Eileen and the children came with me. This was for six weeks from mid-February to the end of March 1977, and the children had to have special permission to miss school. This was granted on the educational value of the trip and on the condition that whenever possible they went to school in Wheaton, where John and Sara Miles were now living.

Most of my ministry during the trip was in churches rather than in universities, although I did speak to students at a breakaway retreat in Carlinville, the headquarters of the Illinois district of Assemblies of God. I also conducted a seminar in Wheaton College on the baptism in the Spirit, more of which in a moment.

Once again, the churches we visited were in Illinois. These included Rockford, Urbana, Granite City, Springfield, Naperville, Schaumberg, East Saint Louis (where we took the opportunity to go to the top of the famous arch), and La Grange. The experience at East Saint Louis was interesting for two reasons, first because after the morning service the whole congregation stayed behind for what they called an agapē meal, or love-feast, where they presented a delicious array of both hot and cold dishes.

That church was also significant because during the meal the pastor showed me the notes of a sermon he had preached which were almost identical to what I had preached that morning. It was on the subject of team leadership based on the church in Antioch (Acts 13), about which I will say more next time. The Lord was clearly saying the same thing to different people in different parts of the world.

Our experience at La Grange was even more interesting. I preached there on the first Sunday of our trip and they invited me back for a series of meetings from Sunday to Wednesday towards the end of our stay when I gave a series of talks on Gideon. We were invited by a family whose children were about the same age as ours for a typical Thanksgiving meal specially prepared for us as it was not really the season for Thanksgiving. It was on the Wednesday before the final service and we really enjoyed it, so much so in fact that we arrived a little late for the service and I was so full I could hardly preach!

Even more interesting was the fact that they enjoyed the ministry so much that they asked me if I would seriously consider accepting the pastorate of the church as the pastor had recently announced that he was moving on. The offer was extremely tempting, but, as I will explain later, by this time I was already convinced that the Lord was calling me to Mattersey.

Other significant features of that trip included a visit to the Assemblies of God headquarters in Springfield, Missouri, a journey to Tulsa, Oklahoma, at the invitation of Oral Roberts to attend as his guests a seminar at the Oral Roberts University, and finally, a seminar I was asked to conduct at Wheaton College on the baptism in the Holy Spirit on Saturday 19th March. On the Friday evening I had been asked to appear on television by a Christian TV station in Chicago and was on my way there accompanied by Pastor Tom Richardson when he received a phone call to say that they had made a last-minute decision to have instead a telethon evening to raise much needed funds.

Although this was disappointing, we had no alternative than to return to Wheaton where the next morning I preached on the baptism in the Spirit and several came forward for prayer and were filled with the Spirit. When the meeting was over, one of them asked me if I had heard Professor James Dunn the previous evening.

I said no, at which she expressed some surprise. Dunn, who is well-known for his rejection of the Pentecostal understanding of baptism in the Spirit, had given his reasons for doing so, but I, without knowing what he said, had answered him on every point. This was clearly, without my knowing it, due to the leading of the Holy Spirit in all I had said, and was in itself an evidence of the truth of what I was preaching.

View Details

My Story Talk 18 Ministry in Basingstoke 1968-78 Part 3

Welcome to Talk 18 in our series where I am reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time we saw how, during the years we were there, the church in Basingstoke grew as a result of the consistent and regular preaching of the gospel by means of Sunday night gospel services, evangelistic missions, personal evangelism and door-to-door work, and ministry among children and young people.

And the fact that God graciously confirmed the message by miraculous signs according to his own will was undoubtedly a significant factor as the supernatural gifts of the Spirit were regularly in evidence in our meetings. But our years at Basingstoke also saw a significant widening of my ministry beyond the local church not only in preaching but also in writing, both in the UK and further afield.

Ministry beyond the local church

Speaking engagements within the UK

With the exception of my ministry in universities and colleges as Travelling Secretary of the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship, the vast majority of my speaking engagements were at the AoG Bible College or in AoG churches or conferences.

The invitation to lecture at the Bible College, which was then in Kenley, Surrey, came in 1970 from the newly appointed Principal, George Jeffreys Williamson. Kenley was a couple of hours’ drive from Basingstoke, and I went on a fortnightly basis staying overnight and giving lectures on the Major Prophets, Comparative Religion, and New Testament Greek.

Apart from the Greek, I had little or no prior knowledge about the subjects I was teaching and so the lecture preparation time was considerable. But I enjoyed the challenge and added to my personal education in the process. I could not have possibly known it then, but my time at Kenley turned out to be the start of over fifty years of teaching in Pentecostal Bible Colleges around the world.

I was also receiving invitations to minister at large conventions and national conferences. Despite the charismatic renewal that was happening at the time in some of the other churches, Pentecostals, having been rejected and ostracized for decades, were still rather suspicious of what was happening, and tended to keep pretty much to themselves, gathering together in large celebrations, especially at significant times of the year, when there was a public holiday – Easter, Whitsun, August, Christmas and New Year.

These were amazing times of blessing as people, hungry for the word of God, gathered for fellowship, worship, and to hear specially invited speakers. Some Easter Conventions, like the Cardiff City Temple (Elim), where I was privileged to minister on more than one occasion, would last from Thursday evening until the following Tuesday, very often with two speakers in each meeting. In the mid-seventies, when I would sometimes be booked for up to five years in advance for Easter, I preached at conventions in Preston (72 and 74), Tunbridge Wells (73), Bishop Aukland (75), Peckham (76), and Coventry (77).

Apart from these popular events which were arranged by local churches, there were also national events like the AoG Annual General Conference, attended by thousands, and the Home Missions Conference organised by the AoG Home Missions Council. In 1969 I was asked to speak at the HMC Conference in Coventry on the subject, Preaching the Gospel in the 1970s. And in 1973 at a similar conference in Weymouth, I spoke on the importance of team leadership in the local church, about which I will say more next time.

Even more significant, however, was General Conference which in the late sixties took place in Bognor Regis and from 1971 to 1989 was held at the Butlins Holiday Camp in Minehead reaching a record high attendance for the AoG Jubilee Conference in 1984. I was a speaker on one of the main celebrations (back then referred to as ‘rallies’) on several occasions, the first of which was in Bognor in 1969.

But perhaps the greatest privilege was for many years being made responsible for speaking at the receiving meeting which was held every year for people who were seeking the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Over the years we saw hundreds begin to speak in tongues, some of whom told me that they had been seeking for years but had never heard it explained so clearly.

Other events at which I ministered regularly were youth rallies organised either by local churches or by AoG District Councils, and the National Youth Rally. I was a member of the AoG National Youth Council (1973-76), who were responsible for organising this annual event at which I would usually either lead or preach. I suspect that the reason I was elected to the NYC was partly because people had come to know of the work we were doing among young people at our youth camp.

That may also have been the reason for the evangelistic missions I was invited to conduct. On two occasions Colin Whittaker, who was then the AoG pastor at Luton, asked me to conduct an eight-day youth mission. For one of these I was assisted by members of the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship who sang and testified in the evening meetings but also did a great job in distributing invitations to the young people as they came out of school. The other time, I was alone, but part of the week’s programme was to preach in one of the schools where I was supported by a Christian band and where dozens responded to the appeal at the end of my message.

Another time I was asked by the Christian Union at Chester College – now Chester University – to do a five-day evangelistic mission for the students in the college. When I arrived just after lunch on the Monday, a member of staff conducted me to the bedroom they had allocated for me.

I hope you don’t mind, he said, we’re putting you in a room that was occupied until recently by a student we have had to expel from the college. He had been practising witchcraft .

I was rather surprised by this, to say the least, but I put a brave face on it and said, as casually as I could,

Oh, that’s fine. No problem!

But when I entered the room, I confess I began to wonder what evil presence might be lurking there. The half-burnt candle on the windowsill didn’t help . Had that been part of his devilish paraphernalia? Or had they just had a power -cut recently?!

Then I remembered what Jesus had promised to his disciples as he sent them out on the task of world evangelisation:

Surely, I will be with you always, to the very end of the age (Matthew 28:20).

I reminded myself of other Bible verses like

Behold I give you power over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you (Luke 10:19)

and I began to take courage. I settled into my room and started to prepare myself for the meeting at which I had to speak that evening. After a few minutes there was a knock at the door. Two men stood there. They had seen the light on in my room and wondered who it was that was in there.

Are you a new student? they asked.

No, I replied, I’ve come to conduct a mission for the Christian Union.

That’s interesting, said one of them. It’s strange they should put you in my old room.

It was the man they had expelled for practising witchcraft ! He had come back to visit his friend. Of course, I invited them to the meeting that evening and the ‘witch ’ said he might come. And sure enough, when the time for the meeting came, there he was sitting in the audience.

I preached the gospel and I would like to be able to say that the man gave his life to Christ, but he didn’t. Instead, he came and argued with me! This went on for some time after the meeting had closed, and after about half an hour, feeling that we were getting nowhere by arguing, I decided to invite him to come to the meeting the next day.

I think you’ll be particularly interested tomorrow, I said. The subject is Jesus the way to power . How real is the supernatural ? Is it safe?

I don’t think you know the first thing about the supernatural , he replied.

What a challenge to a Pentecostal preacher!

Well, I don’t know much about what you get up to when you practise your witchcraft , I said, but I will tell you one thing. When you come under the control of a familiar spirit , you can’t say Jesus is Lord, can you?

I don’t know who was more surprised, him or me! I had said this on the basis of my understanding of 1 Corinthians 12:1-3, but I was not prepared for the effect it had on this young man. He went visibly pale and said,

How did you know that?

Taking courage by his reaction, I said,

Because the Bible , which is God’s word tells me so. And I’ll tell you something else it says. You may not acknowledge that Jesus is Lord now, but the day is coming when you will have to, whether you like it or not. For the Bible says that one day at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father !

As I quoted these verses from Philippians 2:10-11 to him, he retreated out of the room!

I went to bed at around 11pm and fell asleep straight away, sleeping soundly until about 7 the next morning. While the students were having their breakfast, I went down the corridor to the washroom to shave. While I was shaving, I saw in the mirror the face of the ‘witch ’. He was standing right behind me.

Good morning, he said. Did you sleep well?

Yes, thank you, I replied.

Are you sure?

Yes, perfectly sure. I went to bed around eleven and slept soundly until about seven.

Really? I can’t understand that!

Why? What so unusual about having a good night’s sleep?

Well, you see, he confessed, I was so annoyed with what you said last night that I stayed up all night practising my witchcraft . I was trying to get a poltergeist into your room to disturb you. I’ve done it many times before and it’s never failed. That’s why they expelled me from the college. I can’t understand why it didn’t work this time.

Oh, I said, I wish you had told me. I could have told you not to waste your time. Don’t you know that Christians are immune to such things?

Later that day he was seen leaving the college with his bag packed.

Leaving? said one of the Christians. Aren’t you coming to the meeting today?

No, he replied, that fellow knows too much about the supernatural.

What a sad story, but despite the satanic opposition, during the course of those five days over 40 students made a decision for Christ.

But finally, before we turn to the speaking invitations that began to open up for me overseas, which I’ll tell you about next time, a word about those I was receiving from within the UK apart, of course, from the things I’ve already mentioned – teaching fortnightly at the Bible College, preaching in universities and colleges, serving on the National Youth Council, and ministering at conventions, conferences and missions. In addition to all that, looking back at my diaries I discovered recently that between 1972 and 1976 I was ministering on average over twelve times a year in churches other than Basingstoke.

Why do I mention this? Because with that amount of ministry there is always the danger that the family may suffer as a result of it. I am so grateful to Billy Richards who spoke to the ministers in our district about pastors who discovered that their kids had grown up before they knew it and who regretted that they had spent so little time with them.

On hearing that, I was determined that that would not happen in our family, and so, whenever I returned from a trip away, Eileen and I would make sure that we all spent extra time together, like going for a drive or walk or picnic in the beautiful Hampshire countryside and followed by a favourite meal for tea.

And we made sure that we always had good summer holidays too. Apart from camp, which was a holiday for the kids, but hard, though enjoyable work for Eileen and me, we always tried to make sure that as a family we had two weeks away together. At first these were always in the UK in places like North Wales and Cornwall, but our most notable trip by far was in 1976 when we went to L’Auberson, a small village just a mile from the French border in the Jura region of Switzerland.

Back then holidays abroad were far less common and far more expensive than they are today, and such a trip would have been financially impossible for us had it not been for the inheritance Eileen received from her father who had sadly died from a heart attack in 1975.

We travelled by car stopping overnight just once en route at a hotel – the children’s first experience in one – in La Veuve, a small village near to Chalons-sur-Marne and arrived at L’Auberson early in the evening.

Actually it was earlier than we thought. We had put our watches on an hour when we entered France and assumed that the time in Switzerland was the same, but, as we found out later, in those days the time was the same as in England, so when we went to bed at what we thought was nine o’clock, people were rather surprised that we were going to bed at eight!

And when we arrived at church the next morning in time for the ten o’clock service the door was still locked because it was really only nine!

The pastor was Willy Droz – more about him next time – and I had not told him we were coming and had tried to time our entrance just in time for the service so that he would not ask me to preach. After all I was on holiday! So, of course, I ended up preaching after all – in French. But that brings me to the next subject – speaking engagements abroad, which we’ll talk about next time.

View Details

My Story Talk 17 Ministry in Basingstoke 1968-78 Part 2

Welcome to Talk 17 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I was talking about the evangelistic missions we organised in Basingstoke, but these tended largely to attract adults, and the children and young people needed to be reached too. So that's our subject for today.

Children’s Work

At first, the only children we were reaching were those who came to our Sunday School, which was held at 10am before the 11am Communion Service. One of those children was Rosie Wilcox (née Wright), who later became Jonathan’s Sunday School teacher. Fifty years later, I still exchange Christmas cards every year with Rosie and her husband Paul.

However, we soon began to reach other children in what was then a more unusual way. To the best of my knowledge, we were the first AoG church in Britain to organise a pre-school playgroup. I had felt for some time that most church buildings were not being used to their full potential. I talked with Bill Mitchell, the church elder, who himself was a businessman, and he wholeheartedly agreed. The church building was standing empty in the daytime for six days a week. And we were on the edge of a new council estate where most of the houses were occupied by young families.

So, we checked out the legal requirements, and discovered that our facilities would accommodate up to 40 children, provided that we had one adult for every eight children present. We obviously needed to invest in the right equipment, and Eileen knew exactly what to get. In fact, with her administrative skills, she was the ideal person to take charge of the whole thing, and before Debbie and Sarah were old enough to go to school, they could be with her while she was at playgroup.

We started by opening for three mornings a week, but the demand for places was such that before long we were open for five. And we had adequate workers to take the full complement of forty, so for five mornings a week, as well as supervising and organising the children in their play, they were able to tell them about Jesus. That was, of course, the most important thing, but another welcome benefit was that, from the small charge we made for each child, we were receiving enough income to pay the mortgage on the building!

And an unexpected result of running that playgroup was the request I received to exorcise a ‘ghost’ from one of the nearby houses! It happened like this. It was 12 o’clock and the playgroup session was ending. I happened to be present having a chat with Bill Mitchell, when one of the mums came in and said,

Is one of you the vicar?

And although I don’t usually go by that title, I said, Yes, I am.

She then asked if I could help her because, she said, there was a ghost in her house. Could I get rid of it? To which, knowing that in Christ we have authority over the forces of darkness, I replied,

Yes, of course.

How much will it cost? she said.

Nothing, I replied.

Wow! That’s good, she said, the spiritualist wanted a fiver.

She gave me her address and, that evening, I went with another brother to visit her. We told her that her greatest security would be to let Jesus into her life and led her in a prayer for salvation.

Of course, the so-called ‘ghost’ was actually a demon, because there is no biblical evidence for the existence of what people call ghosts, but the woman did not know that. She said that it usually appeared at the top of the stairs. So I went up after it and, although I could see nothing unusual, I did feel a distinct drop in temperature. So I commanded the thing, whatever it was, to leave in the name of Jesus. At once the woman, who was standing in the hall with the other brother, suddenly shrieked.

There, didn’t you see it? It went right past you!

So, although I couldn’t see it, I chased it down the stairs, opened the front door, and told it to get out and never come back. The following Sunday she was in church to say thank you and told me that it had gone.

So running a playgroup certainly put us in contact with the people in ways we did not expect, but in Britain’s fastest growing town the playgroup and the Sunday School we ran in our church building were by no means sufficient to spread the good news among the children, and we soon decided to launch a second Sunday School in a school on the Oakridge estate. This was only possible thanks to the commitment of our teachers who, having taught in the morning in Cranbourne Lane, were willing to give up their Sunday afternoon to teach the same lessons to the children in Oakridge.

Another children’s work was started by Hilda Gibbons, an elderly widow who opened her home every week to some thirty children on the Winklebury estate. And we reached hundreds of children through the holiday clubs we organised. These lasted for a week or so towards the end of the long summer holidays. They were led mainly by Anthea and William Kay assisted by other church workers, SPF students and other Christian teachers all of whom we accommodated throughout their stay.

Notable examples were David Littlewood, later to become an AoG pastor, and Phyllis Parrish (née Sowter) who was baptised in the Spirit while she was with us and later became a student at Mattersey and a missionary to Bangaladesh.

Youth Work

Some of the older children who came to the holiday clubs were also attracted to our Friday night Youth Meeting. This was our main means of reaching young people on a regular basis and, for most of the time we were at Basingstoke, was led by me. Our church was situated right next to Cranbourne Lane Comprehensive School, where Debbie and Sarah became pupils and I became a parent governor. We also attracted young people from other parts of the town where some of our members were teachers.

The church minibus, faithfully driven by William Kay, was vitally important for this work, although it wasn’t worth much financially. At the time we had no suitable garage for it, so it was parked each night in the road at the back of our house. One night, in the early hours of the morning, we were woken up by the sound of our dog barking and then I realised that someone was banging heavily on our back door. As I went to the window I became quickly aware of another noise – the constant sound of a car horn. It was our minibus, and the neighbour banging on the back door had come to ask us to silence it.

I quickly threw on some clothes and hurried outside to see what I could do. To my surprise the driver’s door of the minibus was wide open. I wondered why, as I was sure I had locked it the night before. But my first task was to silence the horn, so I quickly disconnected the battery. Now the horn was silent I could go back to bed, hoping that not too many neighbours had been disturbed.

Next morning, as I was apologising for the noise in the night, another neighbour told us they had seen what had happened. Two men had broken into our minibus, but the moment they opened the door the horn had suddenly started sounding. This apparently had caused the men to panic, and our neighbour had seen them running away. Their attempt to steal our minibus had been thwarted!

Of course, it may be possible to think of a rational explanation for all this, but it’s important to mention that the horn on the minibus would not normally sound unless the ignition was switched on, and there was no form of burglar alarm fitted to the minibus. But whether there’s a rational explanation or not, as far as I was concerned God had protected our vehicle. He works in natural as well as in supernatural ways, and we will probably never know why that horn sounded just at the right moment – except that God knew that we needed that minibus!

In addition to the weekly youth meeting, we also organised at least two week-long missions, one where Warwick Shenton was the evangelist, and another led by Paul and Janice Finn who were the national youth evangelists for Assemblies of God. We were able to get them into several of the secondary schools in the town where they spoke in school assemblies. This way we knew that the vast majority of teenagers in Basingstoke had the opportunity to hear the gospel.

But it was at the regular weekly youth meeting and its associated activities that close personal relationships could be formed with the young people. We organised walks in the countryside, barbecues, and games evenings where we had great opportunities to get to know them better – and for them to get to know us better too. And nowhere was this truer than at our annual youth camp.

New Forest Pentecostal Youth Camp

While we were at Colchester I had organised a youth camp on the island of Mersea and, thanks to Eileen’s culinary skills and to the things I had learned as a teenager in the Boys’ Brigade, this proved highly successful. So towards the beginning of our time in Basingstoke I made enquiries as to what sites might be available for us to do something similar near us, and I discovered that the Hampshire Education Committee had one near Brockenhurst in the New Forest. It was set in beautiful countryside, was within a short driving distance from the coast, and had the advantage of flush toilets and showers!

All the equipment – tents, marquees, tables, benches, cooking utensils etc. – was provided on site, which was managed by a very helpful warden, a Welshman called Eddie Davies. So we decided to give it a go and, as an initial experiment, took a group of about 15 young people for a few days in the school summer holidays. It went so well that we decided to return the following year for a full week and to invite other AoG churches to participate. I put an advert in Redemption Tidings and over the years the numbers increased to some 150 young people each week.

Eileen and I planned the weekly menu which, although it was somewhat restricted by the cooking equipment provided at the site, nevertheless comprised three hot meals a day, prepared by teams of dedicated workers. The only exception to this was that when we all went out for the day – to the Isle of Wight, for example – everyone prepared their own sandwich lunch straight after breakfast with the food we provided for them.

Much of the food we bought came in large cans obtained from the cash and carry store in Basingstoke and transported down to Brockenhurst in the minibus in advance. The rest we bought on a daily basis from the International store in Brockenhurst who, incidentally, issued vast quantities of Green Shield stamps, which, when you had saved enough of them, you could trade in for a variety of items displayed in the Green Shield catalogue. I seem to remember that Eileen and I got our coffee percolator that way!

The daily programme involved breakfast, during which each of the tents was inspected for tidiness and hygiene, followed by a short devotional involving a song, a prayer, and a Bible reading. The daytime was taken up with recreational activities including at least one day trip to either Hengistbury Head or the Isle of Wight, afternoon trips to Milford-on-Sea, or a treasure hunt in the New Forest. As a family we all enjoyed going down to Brockenhurst a week or so in advance to prepare for this, when we would compose a poem giving clues to the route.

But the most important part of the camp programme was without question the meeting we held in the marquee each evening. These involved worship, prayer, testimonies, and preaching followed by an appeal. Every year we saw dozens of young people respond, either for salvation or for a renewed commitment to Christ. And many were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues. I still receive testimonies from people, now in their sixties, of how they met with God in those meetings.

After each meeting there was a break when we opened our tuck shop for half an hour. This was followed by a time of singing in the marquee, or, once a week, around a camp fire. The only exception to this was the long hot summer of 1976 when we were at camp for three weeks and when everywhere was so dry that it was illegal to light fires anywhere in the New Forest. Those weeks spent at camp during the seventies were wonderful times of blessing for all involved and form some of the happiest memories of my life.

But such blessings do not come by accident. They come as the result of prayer, commitment, and teamwork. None of it would have been possible without the dedicated help of Basingstoke church members like Hilda Gibbons, and visiting pastors and their wives who over several years brought their young people to camp and shared in the work and ministry. Of special note among these were Mike and Beryl Godward from Corringham, Brian and Audrey Quar from Crossacres, Manchester, and Colin Blackman from Tonbridge Wells, all of whom became good personal friends.

But these were not the only relationships that were formed or developed at camp. We really got to know our own young people much better too. Some of them came down early to help unload cans of food from the minibus and to assist in the erection of the tents, and I learned that forming relationships with young people, letting them know that you love them rather than just preaching at them, was the way to gain their loyalty and respect. This is essential if we want them to follow our example in following Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).

One example of this was Linda. She, along with her twin sister, Sue, had become regular attenders at our Friday night youth meeting. On one occasion we were having a sausage-sizzle in the church grounds. Linda was standing next to me looking into the fire when she told me she was thinking of leaving us. So, putting my arm round her shoulder, I said to her, Oh don’t leave us Linda. We all love you. We’d really miss you. Linda didn’t leave us, and her relationship with Eileen and me deepened when she came to babysit for us from time to time. I recently discovered a letter she had written to Eileen in 1974 in which she said,

Entering your home is so different… there's such a lovely atmosphere within it... as soon as I entered the home I felt more confident in myself. Thanks for talking to me, so far since I've spoken to you I’ve felt up on top of the world… I want to say a big thank you, but I don't think I could ever write or say it the way I feel to a friend like you... Thank you for praying for me.

Later, when her leaving college coincided with my becoming principal at Mattersey, Linda became my secretary, only leaving when she married a student from Switzerland, where she now lives.

But in 2012 she made a surprise visit to England when she came to our Golden Wedding anniversary. Of course, Linda was an exceptional case, but her story does illustrate the value of making time to develop relationships with children and young people wherever possible.

View Details

My Story Talk 16 Ministry in Basingstoke (1968-78) Part 1

Welcome to Talk 16 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness throughout my life. Today I’m going to begin by telling you how in January 1968 we came to move from Colchester to Basingstoke.

During 1967, as part of my SPF travels, I was preaching in Oxford when an old friend from the Elim church asked to see me. He was hoping that an Assemblies of God church might be planted there and wanted to find out if I would be interested in coming to take over its leadership. I told him that I would pray about it but that my initial reaction was that I did not feel any sense of leading in that direction.

Some weeks later, I had an unexpected phone call from my friend Michael Collins who, as I have already mentioned, was a fellow student with me at Oxford and part of the original SPF group there. He told me that he had heard from Oxford that I might be thinking of leaving Colchester and that, if that were the case, he wanted to sound out whether I might be interested in coming to Basingstoke.

He explained that they were looking for a pastor and would like to invite me to come and preach one Sunday. The church had not had a pastor for three years and numbers had dwindled to only 12 people. Although they were not able to pay me much, the potential was great, as they had a new building on a large piece of land and Basingstoke had a rapidly expanding population.

This was an exciting challenge, but numbers at Colchester were now around 80 and I was relatively well paid. Did I really want to take on another small church and take a substantial drop in income? And did we really want to leave behind the many friends we had made at Colchester? So I told him that I did not think it likely that the Lord would move me from Colchester but that if they wanted me to preach for one Sunday I would be happy to do so.

As far as moving there permanently was concerned, I determined in my heart that I would only consider it if I received a unanimous invitation from the members of the church. We would also need them to provide housing for us, as the salary they were likely to offer would be far too low for us to be able to get a mortgage.

These matters were discussed when I went to preach there, and the financial position was clarified. The church’s income was £14 a week. £8 of this was taken up with mortgage repayments on the new church building and, if they needed to provide us with accommodation, the remaining £6 would be taken up with that. So anything they could offer me would be an act of faith on their part – and required not a little faith on my part too!

In the circumstances, I thought it highly unlikely that they would be able to meet the criteria I had set, but 100% of the members did vote to invite me, and after a couple of months I heard that they had been able to purchase a house for us. Taking this to be the will of the Lord, we informed the friends at Colchester of our decision, sold our bungalow, and moved to Basingstoke in January 1968.

The move to Basingstoke went smoothly and the house the church provided, a typical three-bedroomed semi-detached, had the advantage of central heating, a luxury we had not been used to. With the profit we made on the sale of our bungalow in Colchester, we were able to have new fitted carpets throughout, and to buy furniture for the lounge as well. We also bought a small second-hand car, having left the minibus in Colchester.

We were welcomed warmly by the church members, and the building was packed for my Induction Service with people from other churches who had come to show their support. The speaker was Billy Richards, the AoG pastor at Slough, in his capacity as Chairman of the West London District Council. His cousin, Bill Mitchell, who was an elder in the church, was at the piano, and we were inspired by his God-given talent and grateful for his commitment to play at every meeting. Other key people were the deacons, Janet Collins (Church Secretary), John Nicholson (Treasurer), David Moncaster (Sunday School Superintendent), and Michael Collins.

Another person who was present at the Induction Service and to become an asset to the church was William Kay, who had written to me asking advice as to how he could serve the Lord after he had graduated from Oxford. As he had come to Christ while he was at university and had had no real experience of life in a local church, I told him that this should be his first priority and made a few suggestions as to where he might go, adding as a PS that I was moving to Basingstoke and that he might like to come and help with the work there. Which he did, and within a few months a young schoolteacher, Anthea Bell, was to join our church and eventually become William’s wife and a great asset to the church.

At the beginning of our time there, Eileen’s primary role, of course, was looking after Debbie and Sarah, who were still under school age, and then Jonathan who was born in October 1970. However, she was soon to find an outlet for her ministry when we started our church pre-school playgroup, but more of that later.

Niggling doubts

So overall there was much to encourage us during our first few months at Basingstoke, but we were missing Colchester and both Eileen and I were having doubts as to whether we had done the right thing in moving. Part of the reason for this was that when I had given up my teaching job we’d had real confirmation about it through the gifts of the Spirit, but we’d had no such confirmation about moving to Basingstoke. Could we have really missed the will of God on such an important matter?

The answer came in a posthumously published article in Redemption Tidings written by Donald Gee. He was talking about how a church should choose a pastor (and, by implication, how a pastor should choose a church). He said that such matters should be determined by sound judgment and sanctified common sense, and not by the operation of spiritual gifts. And this came from the pen of a world-renowned Pentecostal leader and author of Concerning Spiritual Gifts.

This was just the reassurance I needed, and I later came to realise that God’s will is not difficult. By definition, God wants his will, and if we really want it, he will ensure that we get it! We will prove his good and perfect and acceptable will if our lives are truly consecrated to his service (Romans 12:1-2).

Church growth

And, of course, one major aspect of God’s will is that he is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). In the years we were there, Basingstoke was the fastest growing town in England and there was a vast harvest field on our doorstep waiting to be reaped. We sought to do this in three main ways – personal evangelism, evangelistic missions, and children’s and youth work.

Personal evangelism

In those days the primary way of seeking to win others for Jesus was to invite people to church where they would hear the gospel. This was something we did every Sunday night in our Gospel Service, even if very often the only people there were already Christians. However, even if today it’s easy to criticise this style of evangelism, it did have the advantage of regularly reminding Christians of what the gospel is and the urgency of proclaiming it.

But clearly the Gospel Service approach to evangelism would not be enough. Neither would a leaflet inviting people to our meetings, unless of course it contained a clear gospel message. Jesus did not command his disciples to go into all the world and invite people to gospel meetings. He commanded them, and he commands us, to go into all the world and preach. God’s people needed to be trained how to do so.

While I was at Colchester I had completed a course on personal evangelism produced by Billy Richards and I had found this very helpful. So I decided that in our Wednesday night Bible Studies I would teach the people at Basingstoke the principles I had learned from this. We then embarked on a programme of door-to-door work, conducting a ‘religious opinion survey’, and found that most people were willing to share their views with us and for us to share the gospel with them. Admittedly, not many came to church as a result, but at least they had heard the gospel.

Evangelistic Missions

But our biggest attempt at reaching people with the gospel was in 1970 when we organised a fortnight’s evangelistic and healing mission conducted by evangelist Melvin Banks. I invited Melvin for two reasons. First, he was clearly gifted as an evangelist, and I had come to understand that my own gift was predominantly that of a teacher. And secondly, because remarkable results were being reported of hundreds being saved and healed through Melvin’s ministry, and I strongly believe that healing is one of the signs that God gives us to confirm the message of the gospel.

In preparation for his coming, we spent months training the people for this big event, which was to be held in the Basingstoke Town Hall, not in our church, and got them ready for an intensive follow-up programme of personal visitation to the homes of those who made a decision for Christ. We printed thousands of leaflets which were designed by Melvin and which majored strongly on some of the many miracles he had seen in his ministry.

Not surprisingly, on the very first night the Town Hall was packed. Melvin did not preach about healing. He preached salvation. And to my amazement, when he made the gospel appeal, 57 people raised their hand. And then he prayed for the sick. And miracles happened. It was the same every night throughout the fortnight, and by the end over 600 people had signed decision cards.

I thought we were experiencing a real revival! But sadly, when our team of trained follow-up workers visited their homes, it became apparent that the vast majority had not really understood what they were doing. They had come to the meetings because they wanted to be healed and that was why they had raised their hands, even though, to be fair to the evangelist, the message he preached was not about healing, but salvation.

Out of the 600 who had raised their hands, only 12 people were added to our church. Of course, we thanked God for the 12, and we had the satisfaction of knowing that the others had at least heard the gospel, but the sense of disappointment among our people was palpable. And I came to the conclusion that at least part of the problem was the advertising.

People with a longstanding physical ailment will understandably try anything to relieve their suffering, and that’s what they have in mind throughout the meeting, even while the evangelist is preaching. They are prepared to do anything he tells them to, so when he tells them to raise their hand, they do, but it’s a mistake to assume that that means they are saved. And as I thought more about it I realised that Jesus and the apostles did not advertise their healings. Their healings were the advertising.

So, somewhat disillusioned by this style of evangelism, it was six years before I decided to invite another evangelist for a series of meetings. I eventually asked my old pastor, Alfred Webb – who was really an evangelist rather than a pastor – if he would come and do a week’s teaching on personal evangelism followed by a week of meetings where he would preach the gospel. And this time I encouraged the people to pray for an outstanding miracle of healing that would take place before the evangelist came.

And those prayers were answered in a rather dramatic way the Sunday after Easter. It was the evening service, and I was preaching about Thomas. He was the disciple who had been absent when Jesus, three days after he was crucified, appeared to his disciples on Easter Sunday. When the other disciples told Thomas that Jesus was alive, he simply refused to believe it. It was impossible!

But a week later Jesus appeared to him too and showed him the wounds in his hands and feet. I remember saying something to the effect that the same Jesus whom Thomas had been able to see and touch was present with us right now even though we could not see him.

After the sermon, as we sang a closing song, a middle-aged woman walked – I should say hobbled – to the front of the church. This was a complete surprise to me as she had never been to our church before and I had not invited people to come forward for prayer, as we sometimes do. Neither had I mentioned healing.

So I went to her and asked:

Can I help you?

She responded by saying:

If Jesus is present as you say he is can he heal me now?

Immediately I knew that this was the miracle we had been praying for.

He can and he does! I said. Be healed in the name of Jesus!

And she RAN back down the aisle, instantaneously and completely healed. I found out later that her name was Ruby. She and her husband, John, both became Christians and members of our church.

And when we produced the leaflets that would inform people about the visit of Alfred Webb, we told Ruby’s story and used it to point out that we all have a greater need than the healing of our bodies. What really matters is the healing of our souls, the forgiveness of our sins, which is available to all who will come to Jesus.

While Alfred Webb was with us about 20 people made decisions for Christ and about 12 of them were added to the church – a far higher percentage than the 12 out of 600 people who had signed decisions cards in the Melvin Banks meetings.

View Details

My Story Talk 15 Ministry at Colchester 1962-68 Part 3

Welcome to Talk 15 in our series where I am reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Today is the final talk about our ministry in Colchester between 1962 and 1968. These were the first few years of our married life and so far I have shared with you about the birth of our first two children, our housing, employment, holidays and transport.

We have talked about the growth of the church and the reasons for it, testified to an outstanding miracle, explained how I got to know more about Assemblies of God, and how God called me to give up my teaching job and go into full-time ministry.

Today I’ll be sharing first how this led me into a wider ministry, and concluding with two important lessons I felt God was beginning to teach me.

A wider ministry – the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship

If I had thought initially that God’s purpose in leading me into full-time ministry was just so that I could give more time to the local church, I was soon to learn otherwise. It certainly did that, but I soon began to receive invitations to preach in churches at weekend conventions, and, more significantly, to speak in Coleford at a National Day School Teachers’ Conference on the relevance of the baptism in the Holy Spirit in day school teaching today.

It was there I met members of the AoG Home Missions Council and the National Youth Council who, if I remember correctly, had jointly organised the conference. The invitation came, no doubt, not only because I was a pastor who had until recently been a schoolteacher, but also because of my ministry in praying for people to receive the baptism and my role in the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship.

I have already mentioned how, while I was at Oxford, I was asked to share my testimony at the AoG National Youth Rally held in the Birmingham Town Hall and to contribute an article in Redemption Tidings entitled Pentecost in Oxford University. So I was by no means unknown in the wider fellowship, and it was probably not surprising that, when Richard Bolt resigned as Travelling Secretary of the SPF, I should be asked to take over his role of visiting colleges and universities, preaching and praying for students to be filled with the Spirit, which of course would not have been possible if I had remained in school teaching.

Universities where I conducted meetings on those early SPF travels included Oxford, Cambridge, Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham, Durham, and Newcastle. Later, after I had left Colchester, I also preached in the University of Louvain (Leuven) in Belgium, and in 1972 in the majority of universities in the state of Illinois.

The purpose of all these meetings was to tell people about the baptism in the Spirit, explain why it was biblical, and to pray for them to receive as I laid hands on them at the close of the gathering. Among the many who received were the chaplain of Queen’s College, Cambridge, and William Kay a student at Trinity College, Oxford, who had come to Christ at a Billy Graham meeting in London.

Valentine Cunningham, a student at Keble College, and the son of an AoG pastor, invited William to a meeting he had organised where I was to preach on the baptism in the Spirit. After he graduated he became a member of my church in Basingstoke, a close friend, a lecturer at Mattersey Hall Bible College, and a university professor who has contributed much to Pentecostal education around the world.

Val Cunningham went on to become Professor of English at Oxford and was a great help to me when I wrote Be Filled with the Spirit, a booklet published by the SPF, which proved to be the springboard for my ministry as an author.

Other former SPF members who became professors were John Miles and Michael Collins. John, after spending some years as a missionary in Congo became Professor of French at Wheaton, and Michael, after serving as SPF General Secretary, became Professor of Engineering at City University, London.

He was succeeded as SPF General Secretary by Andrew Parfitt, who after spending years in school teaching, became an AoG minister, as did Jeff Clarke who received the baptism under my ministry while he was a student at Oxford, and David Littlewood who received while was a student at Essex.

It is clear from all this that during the course of my lifetime Pentecostals have moved on from being suspicious of higher education to embracing it and playing an active role within it. This will become even clearer when we consider in a later talk the educational developments in our Bible Colleges.

Lessons I learnt at Colchester

Of course, I myself had never been to Bible College. And although I had received excellent teaching from my father and from Leslie Moxham, my pastor at Elm Park Baptist, I had received no formal training for ministry, and back then there was no provision in Assemblies of God for supervision from a more experienced minister. So I was very much learning on the job and was conscious of my need for the guidance, help, and the enabling of the Holy Spirit.

But my experience at Colchester taught me many lessons. The most significant of these was learning to trust God for our needs after I had relinquished my secular employment, which I have already mentioned. But there were two other areas the importance of which I began to understand more clearly. These were:

o the nature of the ministry God had given me

o the importance of a balanced theology of healing.

The nature of the ministry God had given me

In my teens I had been greatly impressed by the ministry of Billy Graham. I had seen thousands of people walk forward in response to his appeals for salvation. Surely this kind of evangelism must be the answer and, when I felt the call to the ministry at the age of 16, I soon began to have dreams of becoming an evangelist.

Later, after I was baptised in the Spirit, I came to see the importance of healing in evangelism and, as I have mentioned previously, was greatly influenced by Richard Bolt who was seeing remarkable healings in his evangelistic crusades. And at that time the American Pentecostal evangelist T. L. Osborn had made his books on healing available to students free of charge and I had read them avidly.

So I now wanted to be a healing evangelist, a desire which was evident in the two evangelistic and healing missions I conducted at Colchester. And that was why, although I shared with others the responsibility of preaching and teaching on Sunday mornings and midweek Bible Studies, I always did the preaching at the Sunday evening Gospel Service.

But when Harold Womersley, veteran missionary of the Congo Evangelisitc Mission visited us on itinerary, he asked me – purely out of interest, I think – about what I was teaching at our Bible Study meetings. And when I told him that, when it was my turn, I just gave whatever word the Lord had put on my heart, he graciously suggested that as the pastor it was my responsibility the feed the flock by regular and systematic teaching of the truths of God’s word.

This, I think, would have been at about the time that I had given up my school teaching job, and so, taking his words to heart, I set about planning various series of weekly Bible studies, and I discovered that I really enjoyed it and, to my surprise, so did those who came to hear me. It was gradually dawning on me that my primary ministry was not to be evangelism – though I have not been totally unsuccessful in that area – but teaching.

Of course, I had no idea then how that teaching gift would eventually be expressed not only in churches, but also as a Bible College principal and as a writer. But that brings me to another closely related lesson I began to learn at Colchester, the importance of a biblically balanced doctrine of healing.

The importance of a balanced theology of healing

As I mentioned at the beginning of this series, ever since my father told me of the healing of my aunt who had been deaf and dumb from birth, I have always believed that God still works miracles of healing today. I grew up with the belief that everyone could be healed if only they had enough faith and that the lack of miracles today was entirely due to lack of faith.

This understanding was confirmed by the teaching of Richard Bolt and the books of T.L.Osborn and was directly related to the doctrine that Jesus died not only for our sins, but for our sicknesses too. We can claim our healing in just the same way as we can claim forgiveness of sins, and all because Jesus died for us. I embraced this teaching wholeheartedly, and that is what I preached.

But my experience as a pastor in Colchester didn’t always seem to confirm this doctrine. It was great when we saw people healed, but what could I say to those who were not? Did I really have to tell them that the reason they were not healed was lack of faith, or that there must be some unconfessed sin in their life? And whereas this might apply in some cases, it surely was not true of all?

I simply could not believe, for example, that when Jack Joliffe was diagnosed with a cancer that first disfigured him and eventually destroyed him, it happened because of lack of faith or some secret sin. I knew him too well. He was a godly man, full of faith, and an elder of our church. It’s all too easy for evangelists to preach these doctrines and then move on, while pastors are left with the care of Christians who have not been healed and have been wounded by the teaching that if they are sick it is somehow their fault.

But it is not my intention in this talk to repeat what I have already said at length elsewhere. My rejection of this view is comprehensively explained in my Ph.D. thesis, Healing and the Atonement, where I argue that, although there is a sense in which healing may rightly be understood to be in the atonement, it is not true to say that Jesus died for our sicknesses in exactly they same way that he died for our sins. I have also explained this in my book Just a Taste of Heaven – a biblical and balanced approach to God’s healing power, which is available from my website www.davidpetts.org.

I simply mention it here because it was at Colchester that I began to question what I had previously believed about healing. Of course, we mustn’t build our doctrine on our experience, but if our experience doesn’t tally with our doctrine it’s always good to consider whether we’ve understood the scriptures correctly.

So I was learning important lessons at Colchester which were to stand me in good stead for the next ten years when we would be pastoring the assembly in Basingstoke. Life is a continuing process of learning and sometimes unlearning, and Basingstoke was no exception. Next time I’ll begin by telling you how we came to move there.

View Details

My Story Talk 14 Ministry in Colchester 1962-68 Part 2

Welcome to Talk 14 in our series where I am reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time we began to talk about the years we spent in Colchester and I shared with you how the church grew during our time there and some of the reasons why.

I finished by saying that I felt the Lord was showing us that the key to growth was to follow the supernatural leading of the Holy Spirit. Miracles happen as he determines and I was certainly not expecting what happened one Saturday evening.

I had gone down to the church at about nine in the evening to attend to a window that would not open. As it was still fairly light, I did not at first turn the lights on. After a few minutes, however, I realised that I needed more light, so I switched them on. I mention this apparently trivial fact because, as it happens, the timing was perfect. Within half a minute someone was knocking at the church door. He later told me that he would not have stopped if he had not seen the light come on just as he approached the church .

The man was in his thirties, well over six feet tall. He stood in the doorway, with tears in his eyes. I recognised him because, although he did not come to church , his grandmother had attended regularly until she died about six months earlier. I had met Billy at the funeral and had remembered his name.

Come in Billy, I said. What’s the matter?

Then he told me his story. He had gone to work as usual on Friday morning and had worked later than usual doing some overtime. When he arrived home late that evening, he called out to his wife, but Ingrid did not reply. As he could not imagine where she might be, he searched the house looking for her. He found her in the bedroom, on the bed, unconscious, an empty bottle of sleeping tablets beside her.

Ingrid was rushed into hospital, but they were by no means confident that they would be able to resuscitate her. On Saturday there was no improvement. She was in a coma . By this time Billy was frantic. He was pacing up and down at home, when suddenly he noticed a photo of his grandmother on the piano. If only she had been still alive! She would have prayed ! So Billy tried to pray , but he just didn’t know what to say. So he jumped on his motorbike and headed for our church . As he approached it, he thought that no one was there and was about to drive past when suddenly the lights came on!

I said to him:

Billy, I’ll tell you why you can’t pray . The Bible says that God’s ear is not deaf so that he cannot hear, but it’s the things we’ve done wrong that have created a barrier between us and God.

I asked him if he had ever asked Jesus to be his Saviour and to forgive him for the wrong things he’d done, and he said, No. When I asked him if he would like to, he said, Yes, and together we prayed and asked Jesus to come into his life.

Then I prayed for Ingrid and, as I did so, my prayer turned into a command:

In the name of Jesus, I rebuke this coma and command her to come out of it!

This seemed a strange thing to say, as Ingrid was two miles away in the Essex County Hospital, and even if she had not been in a coma, she would not have been able to hear me at that distance! By then it was half past nine. I told Billy that Ingrid would be all right, and that he could go home – but as soon as he had gone I found myself doubting.

What will I say to him if his wife dies?

When Billy got home, he thought he would not be able to sleep so he sat down in an armchair. He told us later that at that moment he saw a bright light and felt a sensation of warmth flow through his body from the top of his head to the soles of his feet. The next thing he knew, it was 9 o’clock on Sunday morning. He rushed into hospital to see how his wife was and was told that she had come out of her coma .

Please, he said, can you tell me exactly when it was?

The nurse consulted the notes and replied:

Yes, it was at exactly half past nine last night.

Billy was able to take her home that afternoon. She too became a Christian and they both became members of our church .

This was by far the greatest miracle we saw while we were at Colchester, but the growth of our church during the time we were there was not primarily due to miracles or our evangelistic and healing missions. It was due, as I have said, to the Lord’s strategy in placing me in a school where I could freely teach the children about Jesus, to his giving me at the same time key people to help start a youth meeting, and to the commitment of people who were prepared to exchange their car for a minibus.

And as the congregation grew due to the influx of young people, adults were attracted to join us – some from other churches, others who had just moved into the area, and others who were baptised in the Spirit through my ministry in the early days of what came to be known as the Charismatic Renewal.

Getting to know Assemblies of God

For the first twenty years of my life I attended a Baptist church and had never even heard of Assemblies of God. Church attendance during the three years I was at Oxford involved going to the Elim church in term time and the AoG in Dagenham during vacations. So, when I accepted the pastorate of the AoG church in Colchester, I had had relatively little experience of AoG, and I am grateful that during our years at Colchester I was able to get to know more of its ministers and how the fellowship functioned at a national level.

I have already mentioned some of the ministers who came to preach at our annual conventions, but we were also blessed by visits from those who came to us on itinerary to tell us of the work they were doing for the Lord, to inspire our faith, and to encourage our support for their particular area of ministry.

These included missionaries like Roy Leeming pioneering a church in Belgium, Colin Blackman representing the Lilian Trasher orphanages in Egypt, Harold Womersley from the Congo Evangelistic Mission, and David Newington from Lifeline to Africa.

We also had visits from Michael Jarvis and Keith Monument. Michael was the AoG National Youth Secretary and Keith the Home Missions Secretary. I was impressed by the passion of these men to win people for Jesus and both were eventually to become good friends for many years. I recently had the privilege of paying a tribute at Keith’s funeral service. Keith was a few weeks short of his 99th birthday when he died and had travelled over a million miles in Britain during his ministry for Home Missions.

But apart from the visits of such wonderful people, I also got to know AoG better by attending its Annual General Conference and the quarterly meetings of the Essex District Council. It was through the DC meetings that I learned that, if I wanted to become recognised as an AoG minister, I must first apply for Probationary Status. This would last for two years and then I could apply for Full Status. So in 1964, having already been the pastor at Colchester for two years, I applied for Probationary Status.

I’m so glad that the system has since been radically improved and that those who apply for status must now undergo a period as Ministers-in-Training, but back then my eligibility was assessed simply by two ministers coming to hear me preach, after which the only supervision I received was one of them saying, Go on giving them the good Word of God, brother.

After that, I was left to my own devices for two years until in 1966 I was granted Full Status on the basis that my ministry was bearing fruit and was ordained at General Conference held in Clacton in May of that year. And it was during that conference that God clearly spoke to me and told me to give up my teaching job and trust him to provide for our needs.

The call to full-time ministry

When I felt the Lord calling me to the ministry at the age of 16, I naturally assumed that it would be my full-time occupation. And that was certainly the desire of my heart. But when we had started at Colchester the church was so small that they could not possibly pay me an adequate salary and that was why I was school teaching. And even though, by 1966, the church had grown considerably, the weekly offerings amounted to only £11 a week and I needed at least £18 a week to cover all our expenses.

So when, at a Home Missions rally on the opening night of the Assemblies of God conference, pastor Eddie Durham began his sermon by throwing down a motorcycle gauntlet and challenging young men to give their lives full-time to the work of the ministry, I initially reacted by saying to God,

That’s all very well, Lord. But you know that I would love to be full-time, but that simply is not possible at the moment.

But I knew that with God all things are possible, and so I added,

But I'm willing to step out in faith if you will only make it clear that now is the time for me to do so. And if I am to hand in my notice to the school, I will need to know by the end of this conference.

I said this because my contract required that I hand in my notice by the end of May if I were not going to return to school in September. I went back to the conference meetings night after night – I could not be present during the daytime because I was teaching – and all I can say is that in one way or another the Lord spoke to me in every meeting confirming that I should give up my teaching job and trust him to meet our needs.

Of course, I shared all this with Eileen who had not been able to attend the meetings because she was at home looking after the girls, and she readily agreed that I should do whatever I felt the Lord was telling me. We told no one else about this, and when what I felt the Lord was saying was confirmed through spiritual gifts in church the following Sunday morning, I made up my mind that I would ask to see the head master the very next day.

But how do you tell a man who professes to be an atheist that God has spoken to you? Well, you just tell him! And actually he was quite understanding. He just asked if I could consider delaying it for another term so that he could find a replacement. I think I told him, out of courtesy, that I would think about it, but in my heart I felt sure that it would not be necessary. And, sure enough, a few days later he came to me and said that quite unexpectedly he had already found a replacement for September.

When they heard the news that I was leaving, colleagues at work made comments like, David, you must have great faith. To which I replied, Well, it's not so much a matter of faith as of obedience. I just know it's what I have to do. And that's what I told the church the following Sunday morning. I made it clear that I was not looking to the church to meet our needs, but I was trusting the Lord. Some said that they thought I should have consulted them before making the decision, but I replied by explaining that I had not wanted to be influenced by man, but only by what God himself was saying.

Shortly after that, the church held a meeting and discussed what they should do in the circumstances. The outcome was that they decided that they wanted to trust the Lord with me and that from then on they would pay me 75% of whatever came in the offering and they would meet the ongoing needs of the church from the remaining 25%. Of course, Eileen and I were very encouraged by this even though, judging by the level of offerings at the time, what they would give us would fall far short of what we needed.

However, almost immediately, the regular offerings doubled as the people rose to the challenge, and by the time we left Colchester I was receiving a more than adequate salary. Admittedly, for the first year our faith was being tested, but God is faithful and throughout that time we never went without a meal, even though sometimes the best we could do was beans on toast!

Of course, we were careful with our money. We made sure that all the bills were paid and then spent whatever was left on food! Hadn’t Jesus said that we should not be anxious about what we were to eat or drink? Our Father in Heaven would supply our need. And he did, even if for a while we had to cut out luxuries like biscuits and if the girls had to drink water rather than orange squash!

And thanks largely to Eileen’s positive attitude, they never complained. They grew up to understand that, however hard up we may feel, in this country we enjoy a higher standard of living than 99% of the rest of the world’s population. I am so grateful that financial prosperity has never been high on the agenda of any of our children, and God has blessed them for it. But learning from experience that God was able to meet our needs was by no means the only benefit of giving up my teaching job. It opened the door to a much wider ministry.

View Details

My Story Talk 13 Ministry at Colchester (1962-68) Part 1

Our time at Colchester saw the arrival of our first two children, Deborah in 1964 and Sarah, fifteen months later in 1965. Apart from the birth of the girls, the most significant aspects of our time in Colchester were the growth of the church, my ministry beyond the local church, and the lessons the experience taught me. In this talk I’ll be dealing mainly with the growth of the church, but first a word about practical things like employment, housing, holidays, and transport.

Employment, housing, holidays, and transport

Before we were married, Eileen had been working in the Dagenham education office, and on moving to Colchester she found an excellent job in the education office there, which was within walking distance of our new home. She was soon promoted to a highly responsible administrative position which she held until shortly before Debbie was born.

As for me, although the church was contributing £5 a week towards the rent of our bungalow, it was essential that, for the time being at least, I find full-time secular employment. For the first year, the nearest RE (Religious Education) teaching post available was in Braintree which necessitated a thirty-mile round trip every day.

However, a year later a post became available in Colchester at the Alderman Blaxill Secondary School, a little over a mile from our church and a similar distance from our home. In those days the RE syllabus was based almost entirely on the Bible, so lesson preparation was not difficult, and I became very much aware that teaching 300 children every week was an important part of my ministry. I will say more later about how the Lord remarkably blessed that work, but how in 1966 the Lord called me to give up the teaching job and give myself full-time to the work of the church.

The rent for the bungalow we were living in was about £28 a month, which sounds ridiculously low by today’s prices, but it didn’t seem so then bearing in mind that my monthly salary as a teacher was only £60! However, we soon discovered that some new houses were being built nearer to our church and that as a schoolteacher I could get a 100% mortgage to buy one. The monthly repayments would be just £18, £10 less than we were already paying in rent.

The only problem was that the builders required a £20 deposit to secure the plot. Eileen had £20 saved up to buy a hoover, which we desperately needed, and we were wondering what to do, when my mother, not knowing anything about our plans to buy a new property, phoned to say that she was buying a new hoover and asked if we would we like her old one, which was in perfectly good condition. We saw this as a clear sign that the Lord was prompting us to make the move, and we paid the £20 deposit and moved into our new home in August, 1963.

My parents also moved in 1963. They had been living in Hornchurch since before I was born, and now I was married they decided to move to a new bungalow in Eastwood, not far from Southend-on-Sea.

So when the children came along we were grateful for our holidays to be visits to our parents who were equally pleased to have an opportunity to spend time with their grandchildren. Eileen’s parents were still living in Hornchurch, and it was always good to see them, but my parents’ home in Eastwood, with its proximity to the sea and the beautiful view of open countryside to the rear of the property was especially inviting. We usually travelled there on a Monday and returned on the Saturday so as not to leave the church unattended on Sundays.

But that brings me to the subject of transport. During the course of my ministry, I have owned or had the use of some fifty different vehicles, ranging from my first car, a Ford Prefect, which I bought during my final term at Oxford, to my recently acquired nine-year-old Mercedes E-Class saloon. The Ford Prefect broke down in the cold winter of 1963 when the snow lay on the ground throughout January, February and most of March.

I was on my way to school in Braintree when it happened, and I quickly decided that I needed something more reliable. That was when we bought our fourth Lambretta scooter, reliable because it was new, but extremely uncomfortable and at times difficult to control in that freezing weather. So it wasn’t long before I was back in a car again.

In the summer I borrowed an old Bradbury van from the father of some of the children coming to our meetings. He said we could have it for the day to take them to the seaside. Unfortunately, it broke down on the way home and I was left with about a dozen kids on the roadside. As I was wondering and praying what to do, a man came by in a Humber Hawk and asked if he could help. It was a large car and somehow he bundled all the kids on to the back seat and, with me beside him in the front, kindly drove us all back home.

But that gave me an idea. Maybe I should get a Humber and use it for children’s work! I looked in the local paper and saw an ad for a Humber Super Snipe, even larger than the Hawk. It was over ten years old, but I had read somewhere that if you’re buying a second-hand car it might be wise to get a big one. It might cost a bit more in fuel, but the engine was more likely to be reliable! Which has been my excuse for buying big cars ever since!

So I bought it for £80 and discovered that it did 11 to the gallon in town and, if you were lucky, 19 on a run! But it did the job, and I remember on one occasion squeezing eighteen kids into it to get them to Sunday School! It was only a short distance, and I realise now how potentially dangerous that was. But in those days ‘risk assessment’ had not been invented and there was no requirement to wear a seatbelt. In fact, there were no seatbelts. Piling people into the back of a van or lorry was quite common, but of course there was far less traffic on the roads back then. And if it did enter our head that something might be risky, we just trusted the Lord to take care of us!

But it soon became obvious that we needed something more suited to the task, and I traded in my Humber for a 12-seater minibus. And before long we were running four minibuses to bring people to the meetings as one person after another, following my example, exchanged their car for one.

Everything we have belongs to the Lord, and if changing our car for a minibus will lead to more people coming to Christ, we should surely be prepared to do so. The commitment of such people was undoubtedly one of the reasons for the growth of the church while we were there, and that’s where we turn to next.

The growth of the church

The Full Gospel Mission, Straight Road, Lexden, was nothing more than a tin hut with the potential to seat at most eighty people. When Eileen and I arrived, there were only twelve regular attenders, and that included a family of four who emigrated to Australia not long after our arrival, leaving us with a congregation of eight. By the time we left, the church was packed every Sunday with eighty regular attenders, which, in the 1960s was considered rapid growth, and my main purpose in this section is to explore the reasons why. But first, a word about the church programme.

Church programme

When we arrived in Colchester we inherited what was a typical programme for AoG churches in those days. On Sunday mornings there was the Breaking of Bread service, otherwise known as Communion. There was a Sunday School for the children in the afternoon, and on Sunday evenings there was the Gospel Service where all the hymns and the sermon were designed to bring people to Christ, and after which there would be laying on of hands and prayer for the sick.

Midweek on Tuesday evenings there was a Children’s Meeting from six to seven followed by a Prayer Meeting at nine, and on Thursday evenings there was Bible Study. There was no meeting for young people until we started one on a Friday, but more of that later.

The attendance at these meetings was far from encouraging. In fact, during our first year at Colchester, the Sunday School and Children’s Meeting were attended by only a handful of children, and the midweek meetings for adults were hardly better. On Sundays, if we had visitors, numbers might rise to fifteen. I faithfully preached the gospel every Sunday evening, but in that year we saw not one single decision for Christ, largely because most Sundays everyone present was already a Christian.

Apart from the weekly programme, there was the church’s Annual Convention when a guest speaker would be invited for the weekend and friends from surrounding Pentecostal churches would come for the two meetings held on the Saturday. It was good to see the building full and to hear some of the pioneers of the Pentecostal Movement like Howard and John Carter. But while these occasions were a real encouragement, they hardly made up for the weeks throughout the year when so few were attending. So what made the difference in the remaining years where we saw our numbers multiply significantly?

Reasons for growth

It is the Lord who builds his church, and in my view, the major reason for the growth of the church was, without a doubt, the fact that he strategically placed me as an RE teacher in a local school where I was free to teach the young people about Jesus. That, combined with the fact that he sent me key people to help me start a Youth Meeting on a Friday night, resulted in dozens of decisions for Christ, many of whom started to come on Sundays.

It all started when I received an invitation to preach at the Youth Meeting in the Colchester Elim Church. After the meeting a couple of people in their early twenties asked me if we had a Youth Meeting at our church, and I said that I’d like to start one but that I had no musician. To which they responded by offering to help me. David Fletcher was an able guitarist and John Ward an excellent accordion player. Together with their fiancées, Jean and Sandra, who were good singers, they made a great group for leading worship and were, quite literally, a Godsend.

All this, in the providence of God, coincided with my starting teaching in the local school and with a girl called Corinne, one of the children from a family in our church, starting there too. She provided the link between my RE lessons and the local church. I told the children about Jesus, and she told her friends where they could find out more.

So we launched our new Youth Meeting by hiring a couple of coaches to provide transport to the church from just outside the school gates. My new friends from Elim provided the music and I preached. In school I had been able to tell them about Jesus, but I couldn’t make a gospel appeal in RE lessons! Now, in church, I had complete freedom, and on the very first night, when I made the appeal forty-one children made a decision for Christ.

And when a number of them started coming on Sundays, on one occasion eleven of them being baptised in the Holy Spirit, there was a new sense of expectancy among the older members. They were thrilled to see young people in their meetings, and that began to attract people from other churches too, including David and Jean, John and Sandra, who decided to join us because of their work with the youth.

Of course, our attempts to reach people with the gospel were not limited to the young people. I produced a quarterly newsletter which we called The Full Gospel Mission VOICE. We distributed thousands of these to the homes in the area, using my minibus on a Saturday morning to transport ten or so young people to deliver them street by street throughout the area. I can think of only one person who came to Christ through that ministry, but at least we knew that people had had an opportunity to read the gospel even if they never came to church.

After I had given up my teaching job, I also conducted two evangelistic missions in our church. Each mission lasted from a Saturday through to the following Sunday. We leafleted far and wide, each leaflet containing a message about healing as well as salvation, and, of course, details of the meetings. The meetings were well attended, but mainly by Christians who wanted prayer for healing, and although there were a few decisions for Christ and some healings, I have no memory of anyone being added to our church as a result.

And an SPF mission we conducted in Wivenhoe, a village near Colchester next to which the new University of Essex was about to be built, fared little better. It was a great experience for the students who participated, but there were very few local people who attended.

Apart, that is, from Ian and Janet Balfour, a couple from a Strict Baptist background, who came to support us, got to know us, were baptised in the Spirit as a result, and decided to move to a house less than five minutes’ walk from our church. They had four children all under the age of five, one of whom was Glenn, later to come as a student to Mattersey Hall, and, for a time after my principalship, its principal. The Lord clearly had a purpose in our going to Wivenhoe, even if, at the time, we felt rather disappointed with the results.

And Ian and Janet were not the only people added to our church as a result of receiving the baptism in the Spirit. Alan Coe, who was a work colleague of John Ward and had recently become a Christian, came along to our meetings, received the baptism, and joined our church. He proved a very faithful member, and when I was in contact with him recently was still attending regularly. David Littlewood, a former Methodist, later to become an AoG minister and a member of Mattersey’s Board of Governors, was also baptised in the Spirit in our church while he was a student at the University of Essex.

But the ministry the Lord had given me of praying for people to be filled with the Spirit was not limited to those who would become members of our church. I had the privilege of laying hands on Reginald East, the vicar of West Mersea, and on Mike Eavery, the minister of the local Congregational Church and seeing them both baptised in the Spirit in their homes.

So the Lord was blessing us in ways that perhaps we had not expected, and if the results of the evangelistic missions we conducted were rather disappointing, he was showing us that the key to growth was to follow the supernatural leading of the Holy Spirit. Miracles happen as he determines, and I was certainly not expecting what happened one Saturday evening.

But I’ll tell you about that next time.

View Details

My Story Talk 12 Brasenose College Oxford 1959-62 (Part 3)

Welcome to Talk 12 in our series where I am reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. This is now the third talk about the years I spent at Oxford. So far we have talked about life at Oxford, its academic programme, and my spiritual experience while I was there. Today I'm going to share with you my developing relationship with Eileen, our decision to get married shortly after I graduated, and how the Lord led us straight into pastoral ministry rather than going to Bible college first.

Keeping in touch

Throughout the two years after Eileen and I met, we had seen each other almost every day. Clearly, this could not continue while I was at Oxford, but we kept in touch as much as was then humanly possible. Of course, in those days there were no mobile phones. In fact, access to landlines was not easy, and anyway, it was extremely expensive. So Eileen and I kept in touch with each other by writing letters four or five times a week.

We also managed to see each other every two weeks. As I have mentioned already, the terms at Oxford were only 8 weeks long, so by going home for the weekend after four weeks, and by Eileen travelling up to see me for the weekend after weeks two and six, we were able to see each other on a fortnightly basis. This was very clear evidence of Eileen’s commitment to me as the journey on our Lambretta scooter through the busy traffic of central London was by no means easy.

Obviously, we made the most of those precious weekends. On Saturdays we would often explore the surrounding countryside on our scooter or even travel further afield visiting pretty Cotswold villages like Bibury and Bourton on the Water. Or in the summer we loved getting into one of the punts moored by Magaden Bridge and heading up the Cherwell where we picnicked on the home-made sausage rolls and egg and bacon pie that Eileen had brought with her from home. On Sundays, of course, we went to church together before Eileen made the 60-mile journey back home to be ready for work on Monday.

Of course, during the college vacations (which totalled half the year), the situation was completely different. I was able to see Eileen every day again. During the week, this was in the evenings as Eileen was at work during the daytime. And I was too, at least during the weeks that the schools had their holidays. As the Oxford terms were far shorter than the school terms I was able to earn some extra money by teaching in a local secondary school, which was to prove valuable for my future ministry as I was gaining experience in teaching children of a different age group from those I had taught in the years before I went to Oxford.

But apart from working hours, Eileen and I saw each other every evening and every weekend. Sundays were taken up with church twice in the day, and midweek we regularly attended the Tuesday night prayer meeting, the Thursday night Bible study, and the Friday night youth meeting. We were desperate to learn more about our Pentecostal experience and the way the Pentecostal churches did things.

In fact, whatever we were doing, our relationship with each other was from the start intimately connected with our relationship with the Lord and his will for our lives, even when we went on holiday.

As I have already mentioned, our first holiday together was at a Christian Endeavour Holiday Home in Devon in 1959 just before I went up to Oxford. The following year we decided to explore the Lake District together. We travelled the three-hundred-mile journey on our scooter, stopping overnight in Aintree with one of Eileen’s aunts, before finally arriving at a CE Home in Kents Bank near Grange-over-Sands. We had each visited the area before, but never together, and that fortnight was a wonderful opportunity to enjoy fellowship with other Christians as well as marvelling at the beauty of God’s creation as we made daily trips into different parts of the Lakes.

In 1961 we decided to go further afield and to spend four weeks touring France and northern Spain. So we exchanged our 125cc Lambretta for a new 175 which we trusted would cope well with the distances we would be travelling laden with two tents and all the paraphernalia required for camping. However, the moment we set off we both had some misgivings as the weight of luggage at the rear of the scooter made it harder to handle the machine safely, but undaunted we proceeded with caution and arrived safely at Southend airport where we had booked a flight on a cargo plane to northern France.

Our first night in France was spent in a cow field with the kind permission of the farmer. We were both experienced campers, Eileen with the Girl Guides and I with the Boys’ Brigade, but we had never before been woken by the sound of cows champing round our tent pegs and we quickly agreed to depart as soon as possible, particularly as there were no ‘facilities’ available! We determined that after that we would make sure to check into proper camping sites.

We travelled down the western side of France, stopping first at Paris for the weekend, camping in the Bois de Boulogne and visiting the thousand-strong Assemblies of God Church in the Rue du Sentier led by pastor André Nicole. Little did I know it then, but that was to be the first of many visits to French assemblies later in my ministry and sparked my interest in what the Holy Spirit was doing in European countries.

In Angouleme we discovered that our GB plate had fallen off and, knowing that we were legally required to display one, we visited a garage there and asked if they knew where we could get a replacement. It was then that I realised how inadequate my A Level French course had been. Although we had studied numerous French authors, it was of little practical use to us now as no one had told us how to say the alphabet in French! Finally, by writing the letters down I managed to let them know what I wanted and learnt that in French GB is pronounced Jay-Bay. They told us that they could make us one, but it would take a couple of days.

As a result, we had to travel further each day than originally planned which meant that we were both rather saddle-sore at the end of each day. We crossed the Spanish border between Biarritz and San Sebastian and immediately discovered that what we were doing was culturally unacceptable. Eileen was getting hoots and wolf-whistles from passing motorists because she was wearing trousers and not riding side-saddle! Of course, this would have been extremely dangerous bearing in mind the distances we were travelling each day and, at the risk of causing offense, we decided that we had no option but to carry on as we were.

Extremely tired when we reached Burgos we decided to spend the night in a hotel and enjoy the luxury of proper beds. We did the same in Madrid for two or three nights before heading for Barcelona by way of Zaragoza. But before we reached Barcelona our scooter broke down on a mountain road and reluctantly I had to leave Eileen by the roadside with the scooter while I hitched a lift in a Citroen deux-chevaux into a village called Jorba to get help.

It took two days to get the scooter fixed and by the time we eventually reached our campsite at Rosas, on the Mediterranean just north of Barcelona, it was already dark. A day or so later we arrived in Perpignan in southern France, intending to travel on up the eastern side of France on our way back home. But the scooter broke down again, and after two days camping at the back of an Esso station, we were compelled to return to England by train, leaving our scooter to be brought home courtesy of the RAC. Fortunately, it was still under warranty and was repaired by Lambretta after it finally arrived back in England some six weeks later.

That holiday was the last we were to have together before we were married the following year and, in some ways, was a preparation for it. Like the holiday, married life is wonderful, but not without its unexpected events, delays, and difficulties. We were learning to face problems together, to be patient with each other, and to trust in the Lord to bring us through. Perhaps that’s why I tend to advise young couples, wherever possible, to go on holiday together before deciding to get married. But that brings me to how I decided to propose to Eileen.

Engagement and Marriage

It was during my first term at Oxford. We had been ‘going out’ together for two years, seeing each other almost every day. But we had never talked about marriage. I think that must have been because I was very conscious of how serious marriage is. Divorce in those days was far less common than it is today and for me, as a Christian, it would not have entered my head. I knew that marriage would be for life. What’s more, I knew God had called me to serve him, and choosing the right partner was vitally important. So I was reluctant to commit myself.

But just before I went to Oxford my father had a word with me.

You’d better make your mind up about that girl, David. It would not be fair to keep her waiting for three years while you’re at Oxford, if your intentions are not serious.

Of course, I knew he was right. I had to make up my mind. The problem was, I didn’t want to give her up, but I didn’t want to marry her if she wasn’t the right one for me. Finally I did what I should have done much sooner. I decided to pray about it. I got down on my knees in my bedroom at Oxford and told the Lord my dilemma. I told him that I would gladly marry Eileen if she was God’s choice for me, but if not, I would give her up.

And as soon as I said that prayer I received an overwhelming peace and an assurance that Eileen was the girl I was to marry. So, the next time I was home from Oxford, after a long and passionate kiss, I said to her, You will marry me, won’t you, darling? Yes, those were my exact words! To which she replied, Oh yes! Of course I will.

So we decided to get engaged the following summer after my first year at Oxford, knowing that the earliest we could expect to marry would be after I had graduated. After gaining her father’s consent, we organised a wonderful garden party to celebrate our engagement on 2nd July, 1960, and eventually were married by Pastor Alfred Webb at Bethel Full Gospel Church, Vicarage Road, Dagenham, on 28th July, 1962. And the specially invited organist for the occasion was none other than Laurie N. Dixon, LRAM, the friend through whom I had first heard about the baptism in the Holy Spirit.

Our move to Colchester

After our honeymoon in Cornwall, we moved directly into our first home, a bungalow in Colchester, where I had accepted the invitation to take over the pastorate of the small AoG church there. Colchester will be the subject of our next talk, but first I need to explain why we did not consider ministry in a Baptist church and why I did not go to Bible College as originally planned.

With regard to the Baptists, the explanation is simple. Once we had been baptised in the Spirit, neither of us had attended our Baptist churches apart from perhaps an occasional visit. This was largely because the minister of Hornchurch Baptist was not sympathetic to a Pentecostal understanding of scripture, and the new minister of Elm Park Baptist had stated that the Pentecostals’ exegesis of Acts was entirely unwarranted.

Against this, my parents had told me that Leslie Moxham, our former Baptist minister at Elm Park, had noticed such a difference in me since I was baptised in the Spirit that he had said, If the baptism in the Spirit can make that much difference to David, I want it too. Leslie was later baptised in the Spirit and eventually became an AoG minister working with my friend Colin Blackman in the Tunbridge Wells assembly. And although, as we were to discover later some Baptists were beginning to get involved in the Charismatic Renewal, it was evident to us that our future lay with the Pentecostals rather than with the Baptists.

But why didn’t I go the Bible College before taking on a church? The answer is that I tried to. Early in 1962 I applied to London Bible College. There was a section on the application form where you were required to give an account of your experience of Christ. So I mentioned not only how I had become a Christian, but also how Jesus had baptised me in the Holy Spirit. My interview lasted about an hour, most of which was taken up with what I believed about speaking in tongues. Was it for today? And if it was, was it for everyone? As a result, I received a letter a few days later saying that they felt I would do better to apply to a Pentecostal bible college! Interestingly, their rejection of my application is mentioned in Ian Randall’s history of LBC, Educating Evangelicals.

The AoG Bible College was then at Kenley in Surrey. Its principal was Donald Gee. I had had a brief conversation with him after a meeting at the East Ham Easter Convention, and he had promised to send me the application form. But this never arrived. I also heard it rumoured that the lady teaching English at Kenley, on hearing that an Oxford graduate might be coming, had, presumably jokingly, commented that he’ll be probably teaching me!

This, together with the fact that some of my Pentecostal friends were telling me that I didn’t need to go to Bible college, because I had got it – whatever that meant! – caused me to wonder if that was the direction I should be heading. So I said to the Lord,

If you really don’t want me to go to Bible College, let someone offer me the pastorate of a Pentecostal church.

And within a week, I had my answer. I received a letter from the Colchester assembly asking if I would be their pastor. There was a bungalow available for rent for six and a half guineas a week (£6.51) towards which they were prepared to contribute £5.00. Apart from that, they could offer nothing, and it was understood that I would need to seek full time secular employment. But that’s something for next time.

View Details

My Story Talk 11 Brasenose College, Oxford (1959-1962) Part 2

Welcome to Talk 11 in our series where I am reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I finished by sharing with you how God powerfully spoke to me after a Philosophy tutorial through a verse in Psalm 119. Today I’ll be talking in more detail about my spiritual experience at Oxford, which, looking back on it, was to be far more significant for my future life and ministry than the academic programme I was following.

The most important thing a young Christian can do when going up to university is to make sure right from the start that they find, and have regular fellowship with, other Christians. There are two main ways of doing this, either by joining the Christian Union or by attending a local church – or preferably both, which is what I did.

Christian Union and Local Church

The CU at Brasenose was part of the OICCU – Oxford Inter-Collegiate Christian Union. Each college CU would have its own weekly meeting for prayer and Bible study, but there was also a regular Saturday night Bible Study held at the Northgate Hall, situated close to the Oxford Union building. This was well attended by Christians from across the whole university, and I became a regular attender at both these gatherings. I appreciated the opportunity to meet Christians from different denominational backgrounds, and, bearing in mind my experience of the Anglican chaplain at Brentwood School, was particularly pleased to discover that some Anglicans actually did profess the believe the Bible!

However, much as I enjoyed fellowship with these good people, having been only recently baptised in the Spirit, and having begun to appreciate Pentecostal worship, I was very aware that something very important was lacking in their meetings – the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. Of course, things are very different today, but in those days the Charismatic Renewal had not yet begun and most Anglicans, who in my experience tended to view other denominations as somewhat inferior, were highly suspicious of, if not totally unaware of, the rapidly growing worldwide Pentecostal Movement.

And, of course, I was eager to enlighten them! But first a word about the local Pentecostal church. At the time, the only Pentecostal church in Oxford was the Elim Church situated on the Botley Road just beyond Oxford Railway Station. I was keen to attend there because, however valuable membership of a Christian union may be, there really is no substitute for the life and fellowship of a local church.

So throughout my time at Oxford I regularly attended on Sundays both the morning and evening services, which meant incidentally that I missed both lunch and dinner in college because the mealtimes clashed with the times of the services. More importantly, on my very first Sunday in Oxford, it was there that I met three other students who were from Pentecostal churches, which led to our meeting regularly for prayer and to the formation of the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship.

Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship

The students I met after church that first Sunday morning in Oxford were, Michael Collins who came from Dorchester AoG and was in his second year at St. Peter’s Hall reading Engineering, and Gladys Bland and John Miles who, like me, were in their first year. Gladys was from East Ham AoG and was doing postgraduate work in English Literature at Somerville College, and John was from Gloucester AoG and was reading English at Regents Park College.

We were all delighted to meet each other because up to then there had been relatively few Pentecostals attending university. We soon became firm friends and agreed to meet regularly together for fellowship and prayer, particularly for spiritual gifts and for Christian students from a different denominational background to be baptised in the Spirit. Michael had a friend called Philip who was already Spirit filled, and he joined our prayer group too.

I will never forget the day, early in our first year, when there was a prophecy in one of those meetings that people of all denominations, including professors and university lecturers, would be baptised in the Spirit. As I’ve already mentioned, the Charismatic Renewal had not yet begun or, if it had, we had not heard of it, and to be honest, I really wondered if that could possibly happen. But it did, and in our own small way we were to be a part of it.

What we didn’t know then was that similar groups were forming in other universities. There were students from a Pentecostal background at Cambridge and London Universities too, and once we heard about this we naturally wanted to get in touch with them. And a key person to help us do that was Richard Bolt. Richard had been an Anglican ordinand but after he was baptised in the Spirit in an AoG church in Durham his course at Clifton Theological College was terminated because he was laying hands on other students and praying for them to speak in tongues.

Shortly after this he was welcomed by AoG and became an Assemblies of God minister based in a small assembly in Colchester. However, as the Lord was using him in healing and in leading others into the baptism in the Spirit, Richard’s ministry extended well beyond Colchester as he took time to travel to universities and colleges to encourage Pentecostal students and to pray for others who wanted to be filled with the Spirit. He was certainly a great encouragement to me and my family. My mother was baptised in the Spirit under his ministry.

But before I knew anything about how the Lord was using Richard, the thought had already crossed my mind that we ought to form, at least in Oxford, a university society for Pentecostal students. The Baptists had what was known as The John Bunyan Society which met every Sunday afternoon in Regents Park College where John Miles was a student. He and I attended this quite often and I mentioned to him that I thought it might be good to have something similar for Pentecostals. As a result of this, John wrote to Aaron Linford, the editor of Redemption Tidings, the AoG weekly magazine, and asked for advice.

And it was at this point that Richard Bolt told us about the Pentecostal students at Cambridge and London. All this led to a gathering in London early in 1961 when the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship (SPF) was formed. Richard Bolt was recognised as its Travelling Secretary and Donald Underwood, a graduate of Trinity College, Dublin, as General Secretary.

We organised annual weekend house-parties where students were exposed to the ministry of Pentecostal leaders, and evangelistic missions where students would sing, testify, and preach during the summer vacations. We also published a magazine known as The Pentecostal and developed a postal library service where students could borrow books by Pentecostal authors.

At Oxford our group grew in numbers during our second year, partly due to an influx of students from Culham College led by Andrew Parfitt, the son of the AoG pastor at Maidstone, but also because our prayers were being answered and students from other denominations were getting baptised in the Spirit. But that leads me to how I personally started to be used in leading others into the baptism.

Leading others into the baptism

It all began a few weeks after I had started at Oxford when, after one of those Saturday night Bible Studies in the Northgate Hall, I was looking at a book on the bookstall which was about a revival that had broken out somewhere in Africa. Chris, one of my Anglican friends from Brasenose, saw what I was looking at and asked me if I had any personal experience of revival. So I began to tell him about the baptism in the Holy Spirit.

As a result, Chris started to seek the baptism and came along to the Elim church where the pastor laid hands on him and prayed for him. But nothing happened and after a few weeks Chris came to me and said,

I want you to pray for me. I’m coming to your room tomorrow and I want you to lay hands on me and pray for me.

I was frankly unsure how to respond to this. I was very new to all this myself and I did not know if I had the authority to lay hands on him. I didn’t know if such things were the responsibility of pastors, and I wasn’t a pastor. But Chris was very insistent and so I agreed. The next day was Saturday and there were no lectures or tutorials for me to attend, so I decided to spend the night in prayer. This was something I had never done before, and have not done very often since, but I realised the seriousness of what Chris had asked me to do and I wanted to get it right.

When Chris came the next day, we chatted for a bit, and then he said,

Well, are you going to pray for me or not?

I think he may have sensed that I was putting it off because, despite my night of prayer, I was nervous about it. He knelt down in front of me, and I plucked up courage and, quietly speaking in tongues, gently placed my hands on his shoulders. But nothing seemed to happen, and I didn’t know what to do, when I remembered that in the Authorised Version (which most of us were still using in those days) Acts 19:6 says that it was when Paul had laid his hands upon the Ephesians that the Holy Spirit came on them and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. In other words, the Spirit came on them after Paul laid his hands on them. And I found myself prophesying over Chris that he would receive, and that he would receive that very day. At which, Chris got up, said thank you, and left me. And I was left wondering if I had done the right thing.

I had my answer at eight the following morning. I was still asleep, having had no sleep the previous night, when I was woken by something digging me in my ribs. It was Chris with his umbrella. What was he doing here?

Oh, it’s you Chris. What on earth are you doing here?

And then it occurred to me that he might have come to tell me what had happened, so I added,

You haven’t received the baptism, have you?

To which he responded as he continued to dig me in the ribs,

O ye of little faith!

He had, of course, received, and he told me how it had happened. After he had left me he had returned to his room and had been reading a book by, or about, the famous missionary to China, Hudson Taylor. The book emphasised that in addition to faith we need courage in our Christian lives, and Chris realised that that was just what he needed. He looked up from the book intending to say, Yes, Lord. Give me courage. But instead of doing so, he found himself speaking in tongues!

Little did I know it then, but Chris was to be the first among hundreds, if not thousands, of people who have begun to speak in tongues through the ministry the Lord has given me. But that’s closely related to the subject of spiritual gifts and how I began to exercise them.

Beginning to exercise spiritual gifts

Shortly after I was baptised in the Spirit I visited the bookshop at the AoG National Offices at 51 Newington Causeway, London. I bought every book they had on the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts. As a young Baptist I had received little teaching about the Spirit and none whatsoever on spiritual gifts. And I was eager to learn. I devoured books like Harold Horton’s The Gifts of the Spirit and Donald Gee’s Concerning Spiritual Gifts, and I learnt that the baptism in the Spirit is not an end in itself, but a gateway to supernatural gifts like tongues, interpretation, prophecy, and healing. And I was longing to receive and be used in whatever gifts the Lord might have for me.

As it happened, I didn’t have long to wait. I was still in my first year at Oxford when I was confronted with a situation at the church I was attending. The Elim church in Oxford was a well-attended lively church where the gifts of the Spirit were regularly in operation. On a Sunday morning there were often prophecies, tongues and interpretation. Some of my Christian friends from Brasenose came along to experience Pentecostal worship and so far I had not been embarrassed in any way by what went on in the meetings.

However, one Sunday morning, when fortunately none of my friends was present, somebody spoke in tongues but there was no interpretation. No explanation was given for this and, although I was still new to these things, I knew that the Bible was very clear that speaking in tongues in church should be interpreted. I probably should have asked the pastor about this, but he was a busy man and I did not know him very well. Consequently I kept quiet about the matter, but was still concerned that everything was not quite as it should be.

Shortly after that, when Richard Bolt was visiting, I told him about this and asked him what I should do. He said,

The answer is very simple David. You interpret.

To which I replied,

But I don't have the gift.

He then said,

Then ask for it.

But, bearing in mind that 1 Corinthians 12:11 tells us that these gifts are given as the Holy Spirit determines, I asked,

But I know God wants me to have it?

His answer to this was along the following lines. The very fact that I was concerned about it might well indicate that God wanted me to have it. And, anyway, we know from God's word that it is his will that tongues in church should be interpreted. So I would be in God's will if I went ahead and interpreted it. I should pray about it and next time it happened I should ask God for the interpretation and then speak out in faith. Our heavenly Father gives good gifts to his children when they ask him.

Although I still had questions, I decided to do what he said and over the next few weeks kept asking the Lord about the matter. Then, one Sunday morning it happened. Someone spoke in tongues and I waited, hoping that someone else would interpret it. But when no one did, I asked the Lord to give me the right words to say and immediately a few words came into my mind which I began to speak out in faith. I say in faith, but I have to confess that my faith was mingled with doubt. I was half expecting the pastor to intervene and say that this was not the right interpretation! But to my intense relief he said nothing, and after the meeting people came and thanked me for my interpretation.

So from time to time, I continued to interpret tongues, but still with the occasional doubt if what I said could really be the interpretation. And later in the series I will tell you how God wonderfully confirmed the genuineness of my gift when I interpreted a tongue that was identified as a language spoken in Africa.

God certainly did some wonderful things while I was at Oxford, and I realise now that I was already exercising a ministry while I was there. I was leading our SPF prayer group, teaching others about spiritual gifts, as well as preaching in churches from time to time. It seems that others were recognising this before I did, and I was soon asked to share my testimony at the AoG National Youth Rally held in the Birmingham Town Hall and to contribute an article in Redemption Tidings entitled Pentecost in Oxford University. The Lord was clearly preparing the way for my future ministry.

Next time, I’ll tell you about my developing relationship with Eileen which led to our marriage immediately after I graduated and how I ultimately decided not to go to Bible College as originally planned, but to accept the pastorate of the Assemblies of God Church in Colchester.

View Details

My Story Talk 10 Brasenose College, Oxford, 1959-1962

Welcome to Talk 10 in our series where I'm reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. Today we begin on the years that I spent at Oxford between 1959 and 1962.

For me, life at Brasenose College began on Thursday, 8th October 1959, exactly one month after I had been baptised in the Holy Spirit. I travelled there by car with Eileen and my parents, who, after helping me unpack and settle into my room at the top of staircase 11, prayed with me before returning home. This was the beginning of an entirely new phase in my life. It was the first time that I was living away from home. I would be making new friends and be challenged by new ideas.

But there are some things which remain constant in our lives no matter what else may change. I knew that my parents loved me. I knew that Eileen loved me, and that I loved her. And I knew that God had a purpose for my life and that I was now at Brasenose as part of that overall plan. So I had confidence that all would be well.

The fact that I would now be reading PPE (Philosophy, Politics, and Economics) did not faze me, even though I had never studied any of those subjects before. My original purpose in accepting the place I had been offered had been to widen my sphere of knowledge before eventually concentrating on theology in order to prepare for the ministry.

And PPE would certainly do that. But there was far more to being at Oxford than the course I would be studying. There was the social and recreational life which I greatly enjoyed. And it was a great opportunity to interact with people of all faiths and none and to share my faith with them. Opportunity, too, to tell other Christians about the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and to meet other Pentecostal students and spend time in prayer with them for the supernatural gifts of the Spirit. And it was also a time when my relationship with Eileen would be strengthened even though we would be apart for weeks on end.

As I can’t cover that in just one talk, today will be aboutlife at Brasenose, its domestic arrangements, its social life and sporting activities, and the academic programme and its challenge to my faith.

Next time I’ll share in more detail about my spiritual experience including how the Lord led me into leading others into the Baptism in the Spirit, how I began to exercise spiritual gifts, and how we began the Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship.

And later I’ll tell you about my developing relationship with Eileen which led to our marriage immediately after I had graduated and how I ultimately decided not to go to Bible College as originally planned, but to accept the pastorate of the Assemblies of God Church in Colchester.

Life at Brasenose

When I arrived at Brasenose in October 1959 it was almost three years since I had been there previously in November 1956 when I had taken the scholarship examination. Back then I had never seen any of the students’ rooms, as we were staying in a boarding house in the Woodstock Road. So I wasn’t quite sure what to expect. But as soon as I entered my new room, I was pleasantly surprised. It was larger than my bedroom at home, was well furnished and overlooked one of the quads with a view of the Radcliffe Camera and the University Church of Saint Mary the Virgin in the background.

Students were usually allocated a room in college for the first year of their studies, and sometimes for the second year too, when you had opportunity to choose what room you would prefer. During my first year I discovered that the room beneath me was even larger than the room I was in and had the benefit of a bedroom separate from the main room which was used as a sitting room as well as a study.

So when I was offered the chance to live in college for a second year I opted for this room which proved to be extremely useful when we were holding prayer meetings for those interested in seeking spiritual gifts. But more of that next time. For my third year I lived ‘in digs’ in a boarding house on the Botley Road, just 50 yards away from the Elim Pentecostal Church which I attended throughout my time in Oxford.

Meals at Brasenose were, in my opinion at least, of a high quality and I was introduced to dishes which I had never tasted at home. These included jugged hare and braised haunch of venison, the only meals I took a positive dislike to, probably because the meat was hung for several days before it was cooked which resulted in a rather unpleasant smell. Fortunately, we were allowed to sign out in advance for any evening meal, provided we dined in college at least five times a week.

Dinner was a rather formal occasion at which we were required to wear our gowns, and which was preceded by a Latin grace which began with the words:

Oculi omnium spectant in te Deus. Tu das illis escas tempore opportuno…

which means

The eyes of all wait upon you O God. You give them their food in due season,

and is taken from Psalm 145:15.

Sadly, however, I’m not sure that many people took it seriously, even if they should have known what it meant, bearing in mind that at the time Latin at O level was still an entrance requirement for Oxford University.

Breakfast and lunch were far less formal occasions. Grace was not said and there were no requirements about a dress code or attendance. There were, in fact, very few requirements about life in college. Apart from academic regulations, what rules there were related to the time of day you had to be back in college and the time at which any female guests had to be out!

The gate in the porters’ lodge was the only means of access to the College. It was locked at midnight and anyone seeking access after that would be reported to the Dean and a fine would be automatically payable. However, this could be avoided if you were agile enough to scale an eight-foot wall without being caught, something of course I never had to try!

As far as the ladies were concerned, they had to be out by 10pm. This, I imagine, is no longer relevant, as, like most Oxford colleges, Brasenose rightly accepts female students as well as men. But by the time I left Oxford the ‘swinging sixties’ had hardly begun, and there was still at least a nominal acknowledgement of Christian moral values.

For residential students there was also a rule about the minimum number of nights you had to be in college over the course of a term. Any absence without permission from your ‘moral tutor’ would be reported by your ‘scout’. Scouts, who were usually much older than the students, originally were little more than their servants and before my time would clean your shoes if you left them outside the door of your room.

Even in my time they were referred to by their surname only, whereas they had to refer to me as Mr Petts and address me as Sir. This was something I deplored, a tradition which harked back to the old upstairs/downstairs attitude of the aristocracy still very prevalent in the early decades of the last century. If you’ve ever watched Downton Abbey you’ll know exactly what I mean.

Social and sport

Probably the most frequent social activity at Oxford was drinking coffee and staying up until the early hours of the morning discussing religion or politics or whatever else was currently in the news. Of course, whenever I could I took the opportunity to share my faith with anyone who would listen. Most of these discussions took place either in my room or that of fellow students whose accommodation was close to mine.

And at least one of those students came to faith in Christ during his first term at Brasenose, largely through the ministry of Keith de Berry, the rector of St. Aldate’s Church, but I like to think that my testimony also played a part in his decision to give his life to Christ. He went on to gain a first class degree in Chemistry and continued at Oxford to do a D.Phil., (the Oxford version of a PhD). Now, after more than sixty years he is still a committed Christian and once told me that his scientific research had only confirmed his faith in Christ.

Of course, late night discussions were by no means the only occasions when there was opportunity to witness to the truth of the gospel. So whether it was punting on the Cherwell on a lazy summer afternoon, or in the changing room after a football match, or playing tennis or table tennis (for which, in my final year, I was captain of the College team), I was always eager to share my faith.

But that doesn’t mean that I was constantly ‘Bible bashing’. Far from it. I remember how on one occasion, when our team was playing tennis against another college, my doubles match had been delayed for some reason. Consequently, it looked as though I would be late for our Students’ Pentecostal Fellowship prayer meeting.

But it was a three-set match, and we had lost the first set six-love and were losing the second set four-love. We had only to lose two more games, and the match would be over, and I could get off to the prayer meeting which by then had already started. But throwing away the match would hardly be fair to my partner and would not have glorified God.

Then I realised that my friends would wonder where I was and would be praying for me, wherever I was or whatever I was doing. Which inspired me to say to my partner,

Come on, John. We’re going to win this match.

And we did. The level of our tennis suddenly improved, and, having lost ten games in a row, we went on to win all the next twelve, taking the match by two sets to one (4-6, 6-4, 6-0). I’m not sure that John believed my explanation that this was probably the result of answered prayer, but because of that experience I am personally convinced, not only that God is interested in every tiny detail of our lives, but that such experiences bear testimony to others of the reality of our faith.

Academic programme

The academic year at Oxford began in early October and finished towards the end of June. Each term lasted just 8 weeks which meant that the long summer vacation provided the opportunity for students to get a summer job or travel abroad or, where necessary, to catch up on their reading.

Reading was, in fact, a major part of learning, and the world-renowned Bodleian Library situated virtually on the doorstep of Brasenose, provided access to millions of books and other printed items. Guidance as to which books to read was given in tutorials when your tutor would set you an essay to write in time for the following week, when you would read your essay to him and he would make appropriate comments.

At the beginning of term, he would also recommend what lectures might be helpful. Attendance at lectures was entirely optional, whereas attendance at tutorials was a compulsory part of one’s course. The standard of lecturing varied immensely, some academics having very poor communication skills. As a result, attendance would steadily diminish week by week and in one case I remember the series was terminated early ‘due to an indisposition’ on the part of the lecturer!

In my day, the system of assessment at Oxford, for PPE at least, was by written examination. After ‘prelims’ (preliminary examinations) which were taken in March in your first year, there was no further examination until ‘finals’ which were taken in the June of your third year.

I was required to take at least two papers in each subject, Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, plus two further papers of my choice. I opted to take these in Philosophy as this was my favourite, despite the fact that it had been the most challenging to my Christian faith.

For example, during my second year I had been asked by my tutor to write an essay on the ontological argument for the existence of God. This was one of the arguments used by the philosopher René Descartes in an attempt to prove God’s existence. During the course of my essay I said something to the effect that although philosophy cannot prove the existence of God it cannot disprove it either.

It was at this point, as I was reading my essay to my tutor, that he interrupted me by saying:

Oh, I don’t know. I think if you mean by ‘prove’ what we normally mean by ‘prove’, and if you mean by ‘God’ what we normally mean by ‘God’, then we can probably disprove God’s existence. But perhaps we can talk about it another time.

This was the first time in my life that I had been confronted with such an outright denial of God’s existence, and my tutor’s statement shocked me deeply. It challenged everything I had based my life upon. I felt numb. As soon as he had left the room I instinctively wanted to call out to God for help. But what if my tutor was right and there was no God to call out to? But I called out anyway:

God, if there is a God, HELP!

And He did! I walked into my bedroom and picked up my Bible and opened it. It fell open at Psalm 119, verse 99. My teacher had told me that he could prove that there is no God. Who was I to challenge the statement of an Oxford tutor? But in that verse the Psalmist said:

I have more insight than all my teachers, for I meditate on your statutes.

I came later to realise that by reading the Bible the most simple believer can gain more understanding of the things that really matter than all the intellectual rationalising of the philosopher. That verse brought immediate reassurance to my heart. It was not just the content of the verse that reassured me – though it certainly did – but the fact that, of all the verses there are in the Bible, I should turn at random to that very one. This was surely no coincidence. God had spoken to me in a remarkable and powerful way.

And as the years have gone by I have learned how to counteract the arguments of the atheists. I’m so glad now that I did not abandon my faith back then. People will always be bringing up challenges to our faith, but just because I don’t know the answer doesn’t mean that there is no answer! And until I know what it is, I just need to keep on trusting the One who said, I AM the truth.

View Details

My Story Talk 9 Between Brentwood and Brasenose (1956-1959) Part 2

In our last talk I mentioned that three significant things happened between my leaving school in 1956 and going up to Brasenose in 1959. I gained experience in teaching. I met Eileen, my future wife. And I received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. And it’s the baptism in the Spirit that’s the subject for today. We’ll be talking about the events that led up to it, how I heard about it and how both Eileen and I received it.

In August 1957 at a Baptist Union Summer School in the Lake District I met a man called Michael, who mentioned that the following year he was planning to go touring Europe with some Christian friends who owned a car. He asked if I would be interested in going with them and I said yes. I paid to have driving lessons so that I could share in the driving. It was a wonderful holiday, not just because of the breathtaking scenery, but because it was there in Switzerland that I first heard about the baptism in the Holy Spirit.

In my book Signs from Heaven I have already recorded the miraculous escape I had from a falling boulder while climbing a mountain and how impressed I was with the simple faith of one of my new friends who prayed for me as he saw it coming straight for me. His name was Laurie and he was clearly moving in a dimension of Christianity that I knew little or nothing about. So I asked him what he had got that I hadn’t got.

So he started to talk about an experience he had received after his conversion – being baptised with the Holy Spirit he called it – when the Holy Spirit had come and filled him to overflowing. He said he had spoken in tongues and told me I could read about it in the book of Acts. But although I wanted to experience more of God in my life, I wasn’t interested in speaking in tongues, and I dismissed the subject from my mind. And I might have ignored it forever had it not been for the remarkable series of events which took place the following summer when both Eileen and I were baptised in the Spirit.

In the summer of 1959 we were both sitting in the youth meeting at Eileen’s church singing from a well-known chorus book, when I happened to notice a list of books advertised on the back cover, one of which was entitled, The Full Blessing of Pentecost, by Dr. Andrew Murray. The title arrested my attention. Could this be what Laurie had been talking about the previous year in Switzerland? So I decided that it might be good to get it.

I mentioned this to Eileen and, without my knowing about it, she wrote to the publishers hoping to buy a copy for me, but a few days later, she received a reply saying the book was no longer available. The following Saturday morning, I went round to see Eileen and she told me that she had tried to get the book for me but that unfortunately it was out of print. A bit disappointed, I thanked her for trying anyway and, after spending the morning with her, returned home from Eileen’s to my parents’ house for lunch.

As the meal was not quite ready, I went into the sitting room to wait. On entering, I happened to notice a book lying on the piano and casually picked it up – The Full Blessing of Pentecost by Dr. Andrew Murray! But how did it get there?

No one, except Eileen, knew anything of my interest in the subject. My parents did not know where the book had come from. It is true that my father had always had a large collection of books, but if it was his, he certainly had never read it, and didn't even know that he possessed it. Anyway, why wasn't it in the bookcase and how did it get on the piano?

No one had any idea how that book came to be there on the very day that I had been told it was unobtainable. The answer must surely lie in the realm of the supernatural. This was no coincidence. God was confirming to me that I needed to be baptised in the Spirit, and that afternoon, after I had read the book, I got down on my knees and asked God to fill me with the Holy Spirit. But nothing happened!

That evening, I went round to Eileen’s and told her about the book. And after she had read the book she too started to seek for the baptism in the Holy Spirit. As Baptists, we knew next to nothing about it – only what we had read in Andrew Murray’s book, and that, as I look back on it now, did not give an entirely complete picture. As I remember it, it made a strong case for believing that there was an experience of the Holy Spirit beyond what we receive at conversion, but there was no mention of speaking in tongues as the evidence.

As a result we weren't exactly sure what we were asking for, but I had the distinct impression that if I was going to receive the Holy Spirit I needed to prepare myself by becoming more holy. I remember thinking that if I could only live a sinless life for a month, or maybe even a week, or even just today, perhaps God would fill me with the Holy Spirit. I remember driving my father's car taking care not to exceed the speed limit when, as I was going down a hill in a 30 zone, I noticed that the speedometer had gone up to 32 m.p.h. Oh no, I thought, I’ve missed receiving the baptism for another day!

Of course, I now understand, and frequently teach, that the Holy Spirit is a gift and can’t be earned! But back then I was getting frustrated by trying the achieve an experience of the Spirit by my own efforts and inevitably failing. So I thought I would write to Laurie who had told me about the baptism in the Spirit in the first place. What should I do? To which he replied, David, all I can say is that if you are really thirsty, you will drink. But this was even more frustrating. The problem was, I had no idea how to drink! Laurie lived quite a distance from me and I didn’t feel like writing back and saying,

Thanks Laurie. That’s very helpful, but please, how do I drink?

So Eileen and I decided on a different approach. Perhaps we should find a Pentecostal Church and see if they could help us. It turned out that the nearest one was Bethel Full Gospel Church which was about five miles away in Dagenham, and easily reached on our recently acquired Lambretta scooter. So we drove over to take a look at it and discovered from the noticeboard that there was a prayer meeting every Tuesday evening. I was quite nervous about it as I had never been in a Pentecostal meeting before, but we were pleasantly surprised and were impressed with the number of people praying, even though prayers were interspersed with lots of Amens. We, of course, as good Baptists were only used to saying Amen at the end of a prayer!

But what really impacted us was the use of the gift of tongues and interpretation. In the middle of the prayer time there were three ‘messages’ in tongues each of which was promptly interpreted. And we knew that God was speaking to US. These people did not know who we were. We had arrived just in time for the meeting and had had no time for conversation before the meeting began. So when we heard the opening words of the first interpretation we were completely amazed:

You have come into this church seeking to be filled with the Spirit!

All three interpretations were equally directly relevant to us, and as a result we spoke with the pastor after the meeting and explained who we were and why we had come. His name was Alfred Webb, and he encouraged us to come the following Tuesday and sit on the front row where anyone ‘seeking the baptism’ would be prayed for with the laying on of hands. So that’s what we did, but we were rather disappointed when nothing seemed to happen when he laid hands on us. This happened week after week until we finally received after we had come back from our summer holiday in Torquay, Devon.

That holiday was significant for several reasons. It was the first time that Eileen and I had been on holiday together and we had borrowed my father’s car so that we could take another young couple with us. My father had bought the car before he had passed the driving test so that I could give him lessons. (You may remember that I had learned to drive before we went on that holiday in Switzerland). Dad had not yet passed the test, so was happy to let me borrow it.

But, as far as the baptism in the Spirit was concerned, two things were particularly relevant. First, on the two Sundays we were in Torquay we decided to attend Upton Vale Baptist Church which was not far from the Christian Endeavour Holiday Home where we were staying. I was very impressed with the minister’s sermon on Hebrews 11:6 and his emphasis on the fact that God rewards those who earnestly seek him. So I had a word with him after the service and told him I was seeking the baptism in the Spirit.

Sadly, but not unsurprisingly for a Baptist minister back in 1959, he tried to discourage me from doing so, something which, when I started my course at Oxford a month or so later, influenced my decision to attend a Pentecostal church while I was there rather than a Baptist church. However, that sermon on Hebrews 11:6 on God rewarding those who earnestly seek him did reemphasise a word of prophecy we had received at Bethel a few weeks earlier encouraging us to get up early to pray. Now I am not saying that getting up early to pray is a condition of receiving the baptism, but it could be an indication that we were earnestly seeking, that we were really thirsty (John 7:7-39). So for the rest of that holiday we got up early and prayed.

And when we went to the Tuesday prayer meeting after we got back from our holiday, it happened! This time there was another man sitting alongside the pastor on the platform. I had no idea who he was but as soon as the prayer time began he came down to pray for those who were seeking the baptism.

Eileen and I were kneeling in the front row and he came to me first. I was kneeling with my head in my hands on the seat of the chair I had been sitting on. The man, who I later learned was a pastor called Harold Young, said,

Kneel up, brother.

So I moved into an upright kneeling position and he then said,

Breathe it in, brother.

I had absolutely no idea what he was talking about, and I thought it rather strange. But I was thirsty and unquestioningly did what he said. I took a breath. Then he said,

Speak it out brother.

Again, I did what he said and I found myself speaking fluently in tongues. And I did not stop until the pastor closed the meeting 45 minutes later!

Then someone came up to me and said, You had a mighty baptism, didn’t you, brother? To which I replied, Oh, did I? To be honest, it was not at all what I had been expecting. Although I’m not really sure what I was expecting! By this time I had heard or read of so many different testimonies of people receiving the baptism and had realised that in some ways everyone is different, so I was not really sure what I should expect. What I wanted was to be filled with the Holy Spirit. I was not particularly interested in speaking in tongues.

What's more, I found myself questioning whether the words I was speaking really were a language. I had studied four different foreign languages at school and it certainly sounded like none of them. So was my experience real? These questions were going through my mind as we were travelling home on our scooter. But then I remembered something that Jesus had said in Luke 11. Our heavenly Father does not give stones or scorpions or snakes to his children when they ask for the Holy Spirit. And on that basis I chose to believe that what I had experienced was real. I'm so glad that I did. Its reality has been confirmed again and again in my life and ministry. But more of that in later talks.

But what about Eileen? She had had similar doubts when she heard what Harold Young had said to me and when he laid hands on her she did not receive. However, straight after the meeting he spoke to her and said, You do want to receive don't you? and Eileen said yes. So he took us both into the church vestry and placed his right hand on my head and told me to start speaking in tongues again. Then he placed his other hand on Eileen’s head and said,

Now you begin to speak too.

And she did! And later she told me that it had been in that very vestry that she had received Jesus as her saviour in Bethel Church Sunday school when she was only seven years old. So we were both baptised in the Spirit on the same day, September 8, 1959, just four weeks before I began my course at Brasenose College, Oxford, where I spent a lot of time telling other Christians about the baptism in the Holy Spirit. But we’ll be talking about that next time.

View Details

Talk 8 Between Brentwood and Brasenose (1956-59) Part 1

Welcome to Talk 8 in our series where I’m reflecting on the goodness of God throughout my life.

I left school in December 1956 and started my course at Oxford in October 1959, a period of almost three years. In many ways it seemed a long time to wait, but in the plan and purpose of God they turned out to be highly significant years. I gained experience in teaching. I met Eileen, the girl who was to be lifelong partner. And I received the life-changing experience of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. But first, I need to explain how I got my place at Oxford and why I had to wait three years before taking it up.

Gaining my place at Oxford

In 1956, at the age of seventeen, I had already passed my A Levels and had decided to stay on at school a further year to take S Levels the following summer. S Levels – the S stands for Scholarship – were the highest level of GCE exams that you could take and were designed to support your application to university, especially if you were hoping to go to Oxbridge.

However, as things turned out, I did not need to complete my S Level course because in the first term of that school year I was awarded a scholarship to read Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Brasenose College, Oxford. Our form master, Mr. Rennie, had suggested that some of us might like to spend a few days in Oxford and take some examinations at Brasenose College with a view to obtaining a place there.

As there was only one place available I was not expecting to get it. But I decided to go even though my friend, John Bramble, was going too and I thought he was far more likely to be successful. He had always come higher than me in class and had gained better A Level results than I had.

There were about eight of us altogether, each of us taking different exam papers, generally depending on what subjects we had taken at A level. There was just one paper that was the same for all of us, an English essay, the title of which was unknown to us until we sat down in the examination room. And that title was WORDS.

The length of that exam was three hours and, although some boys started writing almost immediately, I spent the first 45 minutes planning my essay. I can't remember in great detail the contents of that essay but I know that I concluded it by talking about Christ, the word made flesh, the divine logos, the ultimate revelation of God Himself.

I have sometimes wondered if the reason I was awarded the scholarship rather than any of my colleagues was that the Lord was honouring me because I had honoured him. Of course, I can’t be sure about that, but he had helped me through my A levels when I had honoured him before the whole class when my History master had told me that I was likely to fail, and I have always sought to give God the glory for any academic success I may have achieved.

And I discovered later that, of all the papers I sat during that visit to Brasenose, that essay on WORDS was awarded the highest grade – an alpha. But when I received a letter from Brasenose offering me a scholarship a few weeks later, I was totally amazed and, after discussing it with my father, I came to the conclusion that this had to be God.

But there was just one problem. The place they were offering me was for three years later in October 1959, after I had completed my two years National Service. However, the Government had already agreed to abolish National Service and were in the process of phasing it out gradually.

They did this by delaying the ‘call-up’ which meant, in my case, that by the time they would have called me up, there would be less than two years before my course at Oxford was starting. In short, I would not have time to do National Service and, by the time I had finished my course at Oxford, National Service had been abolished completely.

So, having obtained my place at Oxford, I decided to leave school at the end of term in December and start to earn some money. And at the time there was a great shortage of schoolteachers, as a result of which young people who had passed their A levels could do ‘uncertificated teaching’ before going to university, and so I ended up doing almost three years’ teaching before I went to Oxford.

Gaining experience in teaching

And, surprisingly enough, it started at the very school I had just left. Or, to be more precise, it was at the Preparatory School attached to Brentwood and standing just on the other side of the main playing field. One of the teachers was on sickness leave for a few weeks and I was asked if I would take their place as they taught French and Latin which were of course my two main A Level subjects.

As it was a boarding school, I was required to live in and be the housemaster for some of the boys, which mainly involved making sure that they were in bed on time and not talking after a certain time. I was only there for a few weeks (January 15 to February 16), but I enjoyed the experience very much and learnt a great deal, not least of which was that, if you prepared your lessons thoroughly, you had relatively few problems with discipline.

After Brentwood Prep I was told by the Essex Education Committee that another job was available in Brentwood, at the Church of England Primary School in Coptfold Road, only a few hundred yards from my old school. A teacher was on maternity leave and a replacement was needed until July to look after her class of 8 to 9 year-olds. The pay wasn’t great as I was not a qualified teacher. It worked out at about half what I would have been paid if I had been qualified. And, of course, this was not a residential post, so I needed to travel on two buses each day to get there from Hornchurch. But I accepted the job anyway.

As in most primary schools, a teacher was responsible for teaching their class throughout the day all the subjects on the timetable. That was not a problem, but learning to keep discipline was another matter. My expectations were based on the level of discipline I had experienced as a pupil at Brentwood and the few weeks I had spent teaching at Brentwood Prep.

Coptfold Road was quite another matter. Many of the children came from a less fortunate background and some of them were of rather limited intelligence. As a result, and due to my own lack of training and experience, and lack of any supervision, I found the two terms I was in charge of that class extremely difficult, and was quite relieved when I heard towards the end of the summer term that Mrs. Istead, the teacher who had been on maternity leave, was returning the following Monday.

So on the Friday before she was due to return I was clearing my desk after school when the headmaster, Dr. Ward, asked me what I was doing, adding, You’re not leaving, are you? And he offered to give me a different class to teach and keep me on indefinitely until I went up to Oxford. So I decided to stay and, as things turned out, I was there until the end of September 1959, my ability to keep discipline improving greatly with experience and the help of a Day School Teachers’ Conference organised by the Baptist Union and held at St. Augustine’s College, Canterbury in August 1957.

As I look back on those years of teaching before I went to Oxford, I think I can see why God allowed it to happen that way. While I was waiting I was rather frustrated, thinking, Why am I teaching when God has called me to the ministry? But little did I know then that his plan for me was that most of my ministry would be teaching.

And although the major part of my teaching ministry has been to a different age group, even when teaching at degree level in Bible Colleges around the world, I have found that God has given me the ability to teach at a level that everyone can understand, something I repeatedly hear from grateful listeners. And perhaps at least part of that ability is a result of those years I spent teaching less able children while waiting to go to university.

God knows what he is doing, and he always has a purpose in what appear to us to be pointless pauses in our lives. But that brings me to an even more significant purpose in those years of waiting, for it was in those years that I met Eileen, the girl I was to marry and who was to be the ideal person to support me in my ministry.

Meeting Eileen

It was an incredibly hot day that Saturday afternoon. So hot in fact that the railway line buckled in the heat of the sun. It was Saturday 29th June, 1957 and we had arranged a youth rally where the young people from Elm Park Baptist would meet up with Hornchurch Baptist young people for fun and games in the park followed by an open air service.

Although the churches were only two miles apart, before then we had had little contact with them, so I actually knew none of the young people there. People have often asked me how I met Eileen and I have usually replied, In the park!

After a game of rounders, we sat down in groups and had a picnic tea. I noticed a group of four rather attractive girls sitting a few yards away and thought I would like to take a closer look!

So I got up and walked towards them and happened to notice that one of them had taken her shoes off. On impulse, I picked up one of the shoes and ran off with it, with nothing in particular in mind other than just having a bit of fun. Needless to say, the owner of the shoe ran after me but was at something of a disadvantage as she had bare feet. I soon disappeared from view and hid the shoe under the bridge that spanned the park lake.

Of course, when she caught up with me, I felt a bit of an idiot and showed her where the shoe was. We got into conversation and I asked her if she would like to come to our Saturday evening youth club which took place after the open air service. She agreed and, after sharing a song sheet at the open air, I found out that her name was Eileen and that she was just six days older than me. After youth club I walked her home and kissed her goodnight. And that was the beginning of a relationship that lasted, with a short break, for 67 years and which ended only when the Lord called her home at the age of 85.

We agreed to meet again some time the following week, but the next day, after attending church in the morning, I decided to go to Hornchurch Baptist for their evening service in the hope of seeing Eileen again. She and her friend were sitting in the choir and her friend noticed me in the congregation and said to Eileen, He's here!

After the service we went for a long walk in the park and from then on were to see each other just about every day. I discovered that Eileen had attended Romford County High School and had left after taking her O levels. At the time she was working at Barts (St. Bartholemew’s Hospital) in London, but a year later she accepted a post in the Dagenham Education Office which was closer to home.

But before that, I have to confess that there was a short break in our relationship during the last few months of 1957. I mentioned earlier that I attended a conference in Canterbury during the last week in August of that year. Everyone there was a qualified schoolteacher with the exception of me and one other person, a girl called Irene who was the same age as me and had been accepted to train as a teacher at the Chelsea College for Physical Education in Eastbourne.

Irene was extremely attractive, highly intelligent, and very good at sport – she was nearly good enough to beat me at table tennis! But she was having doubts about her faith, and I spent some time with her trying to encourage her. As a result we were both very attracted to each other and, to cut the story short, because I have never been proud of myself about this, we started to see each other after the conference was over.

When I next saw Eileen I told her, without mentioning Irene, that I felt we had been seeing too much of each other, that our relationship had been getting too intense – which it probably was – and that I thought we should cool it and not see each other for a while.

She later told me that she had not been too concerned because she was convinced that if I was the right one for her, the Lord would bring me back to her. Which he did. The relationship with Irene lasted only a few weeks – until the middle of October, when I went to Eastbourne for a weekend to see her at her college. In short, she jilted me!

But not long before Christmas the young people from Hornchurch Baptist came to Elm Park to take our Friday evening YPF meeting. And who should be singing in the choir but Eileen. I think we spoke briefly after the meeting, just polite conversation, but it was enough to arouse my interest in her again. So I sent her a Christmas card, and she replied by sending me one and enclosing this short poem:

I do believe that God above created you for me to love.

He picked you out from all the rest because he knew I'd love you best.

I had a heart so warm and true, but now it's gone from me to you.

Take care of it as I have done, for you have two and I have none.

Not the best poetry in the world, but it touched my heart and I wrote to Eileen – I still have a copy of that letter – asking if she would like to resume our relationship. And from January 2nd 1958 hardly a day passed without our seeing each other.

View Details

Talk 7 Elm Park Baptist Church (1951-1958) Part 2

Welcome to Talk 7 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Today I’m going to tell you about my decision to follow Christ, my baptism and church membership, and my call to the ministry.

My decision to follow Christ

As I mentioned in an earlier talk, I cannot remember a time when I did not believe in Jesus, and, when at the age of eight I was asked by my father if I believed that Jesus had died for me, my immediate answer was yes. That was, after all, what I had been brought up to believe. But there is more to salvation than believing. Jesus began his ministry by preaching,

The time has come…Repent and believe the gospel (Mark 1:15).

The fact that Jesus loved us enough to die for our sins demands a response. If we truly believe it, we will repent, because we will hate the fact that our sins made it necessary for Jesus to suffer and die in our place. And true repentance will involve not just being sorry. It will entail a decision to turn from our sin, and to dedicate our whole life to him.

I made that decision in April 1953 at the age of fourteen. Why it took so long I’m not quite sure. I remember that when I was about eleven my Sunday School Teacher asked us if we would like to ‘ask Jesus to come into our hearts’ and for some reason I didn’t respond. I think that part of the reason was embarrassment. I didn’t want my parents and some of my aunts making a fuss and saying how wonderful it was that David had ‘made a decision’. So what eventually prompted me to surrender to the claims of Christ and give my life to him?

Of course the correct theological answer to that question is the convicting power of the Holy Spirit working through the preaching of the Word of God. And that must have been what was happening, although I didn’t realise it at the time. For several weeks in Bible Class my father had been preaching on John 3:16. Week by week I was constantly challenged by the thought that, if God loved me so much that he gave his only Son to die on the cross and save me from my sins, surely the very least I could do would be to give my life to him.

So the major driving force behind my decision to do just that was undoubtedly the love of God. But that was not the only factor. There was also the fear of hell. And I think that may have been what finally clinched it. I was made very aware of the reality of hell through the preaching of Evangelist Tom Rees one Saturday night in the Central Hall, Westminster.

Elm Park was only an hour’s journey from central London and a group of us had travelled in to hear him [1]. Towards the close of his sermon, he stressed the dangers of rejecting Christ, and when he made the appeal I knew that I should stand up along with the many others who were responding to his message. But once again I resisted. My pride was holding me back. I didn’t want to make a public declaration that I was a sinner who needed to be saved.

My baptism

But the next day everything changed. There was to be a baptismal service in the evening and during the day my mother asked me if I had ever thought of being baptised, and I found myself saying yes. I understood very well that her question was not merely about being baptised. It carried with it part of the significance of baptism, the confession of Jesus Christ as my Saviour, my Lord, and my God.

And so that evening when the minister made the appeal at the end of his sermon, while the congregation was singing the closing hymn, I walked forward with several other young people to indicate publicly my decision to give my life to Jesus and my desire to obey him by being baptised.

The next baptismal service was arranged for July 19th, so there were several weeks to wait. But that gave us the opportunity to attend weekly baptismal classes at the ‘manse’, the name given to the house where the minister lived. Each week he taught us the basics about the Christian life, paying special attention to the subject of baptism, and explaining why infant baptism, which is practised in some churches, is not biblical [2].

However, there was no teaching on the baptism in the Holy Spirit, which was something I did not hear about until I met some Pentecostal Christians a few years later. Nevertheless, I did find the minister’s teaching very helpful, and I think that’s why, when I became a pastor myself, I decided to provide similar classes for all those wanting to be baptised. In fact, the talks that I gave were later to form the basis of the contents of my little book, How to Live for Jesus. And of course they did include teaching on the baptism in the Spirit.

When the day scheduled for the baptismal service finally arrived, the baptisms took place at the end of the Sunday evening service. The minister, who was dressed in black waterproof clothing, went down into the water first. Then, one at a time, the candidates went down to be baptised and each of us was asked by name,

Do you acknowledge Jesus Christ as your Saviour, your Lord, and your God?

To which we replied, I do.

Then the minister would say,

Then on the confession of your faith and repentance towards God, I baptise you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

He then immediately baptised us, leaning us backwards into the water, dipping us right under (because that’s the meaning of the word baptise) and as we came up out of the water the whole church would sing,

Follow, follow, I would follow Jesus, Anywhere, everywhere, I would follow on.

Follow, follow, I would follow Jesus, Anywhere he leads me I will follow on.

And that is something I can honestly say I have tried to do ever since. And now, 72 years later, I have no regrets. The pathway he has led, and is still leading me on, has been wonderful. It has not always been easy, but it’s been far better than going my own way. God’s way is always best.

Church membership

After baptism, the next step was to become a church member. Of course, from the perspective of the New Testament, we all become members of the church the moment we receive Christ as our Saviour. We become members of the universal church which is comprised of all Christians, those already in Heaven, the church triumphant, and those still on earth, the worldwide church, the church militant. Our membership of that church remains permanent as long as we remain Christians.

But which local church we belong to may vary from time to time according to where we are living. And, of course, in any one area there may be several different local churches, which has sadly resulted in some Christians having no real commitment to any one local church and acknowledging no real accountability to any church leadership.

This is why many local churches, while recognising that all Christians who worship with them are members of the body of Christ, the universal church, nevertheless insist that to be a member of their local church a person must identify with the doctrinal beliefs of that church, acknowledge their accountability to the leadership and their fellow church members, and show a genuine commitment to that church.

And that was what was expected of me when, shortly after my baptism, I asked to become a member of Elm Park Baptist Church. The application process was simple. I had to ask someone who was already a member to be my sponsor. After a friendly interview he brought a report to the next Church Members’ Meeting and my name, together with the names of other young people who had been baptised at the same time as me, was put to the vote. As a result we were all accepted into membership.

Church membership carried with it the privilege of being able to join in the discussions at church meetings and included the right to vote, even for those of the minimum age for membership, which was just fourteen. I always enjoyed those meetings, which were held every two months. Being able to participate in decision making meant that I felt a sense of responsibility and I was constantly aware of developments in the church programme.

Now I realise that different churches operate in many different ways and that some leaders are hesitant to involve the members in this kind of way for fear of the kind of unpleasantness that I have heard has gone on in some church meetings. All I can say to that is that, in my experience, the advantages of involving the people in decision making on important matters far outweigh any disadvantages.

What’s more, the dangers of abuse and corruption that so often have taken place when all the power is vested in a few, or even in just one person, must be avoided at all costs. I do believe that leadership should lead, and lead by example. But to be a leader is not the same as being a dictator. If you are really a leader, people will follow you. That’s why, as a church leader, I have never been afraid to ask the people to endorse any major decisions made by the leadership team. But that brings me to my call to ministry.

My call to ministry

As a teenager, of course, my understanding of church and church leadership was very much determined by my limited experience of Elm Park Baptist Church. Like most people then, and many people still today, I assumed that a local church must be led by a man called the minister or vicar. It was his responsibility to lead and preach at all the services and that, to do this, he needed to have received a special call from God.

So when I refer to my call to the ministry I am using the expression in the way that I understood things back then. I have since come to see things very differently, and that will become evident in later talks. For now, it will be enough to say that I now understand that the word minister simply means servant and that, since all God's people are called to serve him, all God's people are in a sense ministers. But that is not to say that some people do not receive a special call to some particular area of service.

In my particular case, I now realise that other people may have seen in me the potential to become a preacher long before I realised it myself. I was only fourteen when I was asked to give a short talk in the Sunday evening service at my church. It was what was called a Youth Sunday when the young people from my father's Bible class were asked to take responsibility for the service.

Three of us were asked to speak for five minutes each and my father gave us help as to what we might say. That was my first experience of public speaking and, to my surprise, the following year I was invited to take on the preaching single handed. Then, another year later, I was asked to preach at the Sunday morning service. I am so grateful to the church leaders for spotting the potential that was in me and giving me the opportunity to develop it.

Even then, however, although I enjoyed preaching, I did not feel any sense of call. That came when I attended a Baptist Church summer school held at Mamhead, not many miles from where I now live in beautiful Devon. Mamhead House, built in the nineteenth century regardless of cost and set in 164 acres of glorious parkland overlooking Lyme Bay and Exmouth has been described as ‘Devon’s grandest country mansion’.

Summer School was a holiday for young Christians which included sessions of teaching until 11:00 AM and evening meetings for worship and further teaching after the evening meal. The rest of the day was taken up with leisure activities which included trips to the nearby seaside town of Dawlish, coach trips to Dartmoor, and rambles in the countryside surrounding Mamhead.

I attended Summer School there for three years in succession from 1954 to 1956. But it was in 1955 that the Lord clearly spoke to me about my future. I had completed my O Levels in 1954 and was now halfway through my A Level course and beginning to think about my future. But I wasn’t particularly looking for guidance at that point as I was expecting to go to university after my A Levels and felt I had plenty of time to make up my mind.

Then, one evening, after the preacher had finished speaking and we had sung the final song, the Revd. Cyril Rushbridge, who had been leading the meeting, said something like this:

This isn’t part of what we had planned for this evening, but I just feel that the Lord wants me to tell you how I felt my call to the ministry.

He went on to explain that he had had no dramatic experience like Saul on the road to Damascus but described in a simple way how he had ‘received his call’. Unfortunately, I can’t remember the details of what he said. All I can tell you is that when he had finished speaking I just knew that God wanted me to be a minister. And to clinch it, Kathleen O’Connor, a girl from our church came up to me as soon as the meeting had finished and said,

David, do you now know what God wants you to do with your life?

To which I replied,

Yes, Kate, I’m going to be a minister.

I later went and spoke with the Revd. Rex Mason, a graduate of Regent’s Park College, Oxford, who had been the preacher that evening and asked for his advice. He had read English (I think) at St Edmund Hall, Oxford, before going on the read Theology at Regent’s Park. He recommended that I do something similar, widening my outlook on life by taking a degree in something different before concentrating on Theology.

The next thing to do was to let my parents know what had happened and, as I was away at Mamhead for at least another week, I sent them a postcard saying something like,

I hope you don’t mind, but I’ve decided to be a minister!

And when I got home they told me something they had never told me before. They had prayed for this from before I was born.

I also told my minister, the Revd. Leslie H. Moxham, about my call to the ministry and asked if there was anything I could do immediately to start to prepare for what God was calling me to. And he suggested that I start attending the midweek Prayer and Bible Study meeting, something I had not done because of all my other commitments to church activities. So I did what he suggested and was not disappointed. He was a great Bible teacher and I learnt a lot in those meetings, even though, as I have already mentioned, the number of meetings got me into trouble with my History teacher at school.

So looking back, I am very grateful to God for my years at Elm Park Baptist and, although I was to move on when I was baptised in the Spirit in 1959, my remaining years there were to prove some of the most exciting and significant years of my life.

But that’s the subject of the next talk.

[1] Incidentally, in the years that followed we also went several times to hear Billy Graham during his visits to Haringey, Earls Court, and Wembley Stadium.

[2] Please see Chapter Thirteen of You’d Better Believe It where I show the biblical reasons for saying this.

View Details

Talk 6. Elm Park Baptist Church (1951-1958) Part One

Welcome to Talk 6 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. In the last two episodes I have been talking about my experiences at Brentwood School. Today we’re turning to my time at Elm Park Baptist Church.

One great advantage of being a day boy rather than a boarder at Brentwood School was that I was free on Sundays to attend church. It also meant that I came into regular contact with girls, something which was seriously lacking for boys who were boarders.

This, I think, was quite important for me because, as an only child, I had no sisters, but at least through the activities of the local church I was able to form healthy relationships with the opposite sex. In fact I suspect that as a teenager the girls were one of the attractions of going to church! And at Elm Park Baptist there were plenty of activities to choose from. So let’s begin by talking about the church programme.

Church programme

Unlike many churches today where there is only one meeting on a Sunday and another, perhaps, during the week, at our church something was happening every single day of the week. Of course, Sunday was the busiest day. From 10-11am the Boys’ Brigade held their Bible Class. From 11-12 there was the Morning Service.

In the afternoon there was Sunday School from 2.30-3.30 and again from 3.30-4.30, the numbers attending being so great that two separate sessions were necessary. For teenagers there was Bible Class (taught by my father) followed by a discussion group for young people held between 4 and 5pm.

Very often we stayed at church for tea in order to be there for the 6.30 Evening Service which was then followed by a ‘sing-song’ at about 8pm. In fact, apart from going home at lunch time for the traditional Sunday roast prepared by my mother, as a teenager I was at church from 10am to 9pm every Sunday.

During the week, meetings for young people included the Boys’ Brigade, the Girls’ Life Brigade, the Young People’s Fellowship (YPF), and the Youth Club. For adults there was a midweek meeting for Prayer and Bible Study conducted by the Minister, and there were separate men’s meetings and women’s meetings too. All these activities took place on church premises. There were never any home groups in those days. That was something that became popular in the 1970s.

My personal involvement

I was personally involved in most of the activities I’ve just mentioned. This was not the result of any parental coercion. I just wanted to be there and, as I have already mentioned, on Sundays I was at church for almost the whole day. This was from the age of 14 until I was about 17. It was largely through my father’s teaching in Bible Class on Sunday afternoons that I decided to give my life to Jesus – but more of that later.

Dad was a gifted preacher and teacher, and the majority of the thirty or more young people attending Bible Class made decisions for Christ as a result of his ministry. Whenever there was a baptismal service on a Sunday evening, Mum and Dad would invite three or four young people to come for tea after Bible Class and then go on to the service after tea.

Over the years, many of those young people responded to the appeal at the end of the service and walked forward to indicate that they were giving their lives to Jesus and would like to be baptised. One of those young people was my friend, Don Campbell, who emigrated to Australia and, when I last heard from him two or three years ago, he was still attending a Baptist church over there.

Apart from the Bible Class I attended on Sunday afternoons, I also went to the Boys’ Brigade Bible Class every Sunday morning. The Boys’ Brigade was found by Sir William Smith in 1886. If I remember it correctly, its purpose was:

The advancement of Christ’s kingdom among boys, and the promotion of habits of obedience, reverence, discipline, self-respect, and all that tends towards a true Christian manliness.

As well as the Sunday morning Bible Class, our company, which was known as the Second Hornchurch Company of the Boys’ Brigade, held two other meetings each week. Tuesday evenings were dedicated to drill practice, where, after we had been inspected to ensure that we were smartly dressed and our uniforms were being worn correctly, we learned how to stand to attention correctly, to salute the Lieutenants and Captain, and to do basic marching manoeuvres both individually and as company.

When I was seventeen and had been promoted to the rank of sergeant I was awarded the N.C.O’s Proficiency Star after demonstrating that I could give the correct commands for the Company to make these manoeuvres on drill parade.

Of course all this was exactly the same kind of thing the other boys at my school were doing in the CCF and I realise that some might see my being in the Boys’ Brigade as quite inconsistent with my refusal to join the CCF on the grounds that I was a conscientious objector. However, unlike the boys in the CCF, in the BB we were not taught to use military weapons.

On Fridays, time was given for more recreational activities, and opportunity was given to learn to play the bugle or a drum. After a couple of attempts at making the right sound come out of a bugle – it’s by no means as simple as just blowing – I decided it wasn’t for me. This was partly because at the time I found it difficult to sing in tune and I reasoned that if I couldn’t sing properly I probably wouldn’t be able to keep in tune on the bugle either! And sadly all the drums were already allocated to other boys.

But perhaps the best thing about the BB was its annual camp. This took place every year during the school summer holidays. Wherever it was held, it was always within walking distance of the sea.

My first camp was a great adventure for me as, at the age of twelve, I had never been away from home without my parents. It was held in Mudeford on the south coast of England, and I loved it. I went to BB camp on six occasions, Mudeford (1951), Highcliffe in Dorset (1952), Walmer in Kent (1953, ’54, and ’55), and Corton in Suffolk (1956).

It was fun sleeping in a field with six other boys in a tent, each with a straw-filled sack called a paillasse (pronounced pally ass!) as a mattress, your kit bag as a pillow, and only a couple of rough, rather itchy, blankets to keep you warm. If sleeping-bags were invented back then, we’d certainly never heard of them! I say it was fun, and it was, just rather uncomfortable fun.

And, of course, the first night we hardly slept. And when we did finally get to sleep it wasn’t long before we awakened by the musical notes of the bugle playing Reveille. Time to get up, get washed and dressed and go to the toilet. The toilets or ‘latrines’ were just holes in the ground dug the day before by the ‘advance party’ who had travelled down earlier to prepare the camp site, and the washing facilities were just metal bowls of cold water on trestle tables.

Every day was punctuated with a variety of bugle calls summoning us to ‘fall in’ (form a line outside our tents), or telling us that the next meal was ready, and so on, until the final call of the day, which was ‘lights out.’ Apart from mealtimes, activities included getting your tent ready for ‘tent inspection’ each morning, doing chores like peeling potatoes (otherwise known as ‘spud-bashing’), going down to the beach for a supervised swim, leisure activities such as football and cricket, and a certain amount of free time.

There were also various devotional activities, like a service in the marquee on Sunday mornings and, if I remember correctly, a Bible reading and short word from the camp padre after breakfast on other days. But for most boys, the majority of whom did not come from Christian homes, the ‘religious’ bits were something you endured rather than enjoyed in order to be allowed to join in the fun that the other aspects of BB had to offer. In fact, as far as I know, sadly, very few of the fifty boys in the company ever made a decision for Christ.

The benefits for me, however, were inestimable. BB instilled in me the need for personal discipline and loyalty. It gave me the opportunity to mix with boys who were from a very different social background from most of my friends at Brentwood School. It gave me experience in leadership, and it taught me a great deal about how to organise a camp – something that was to prove very valuable when later, in pastoral ministry, I was able year after year to run a Youth Camp for up to 150 teenagers where we saw dozens of young people saved and filled with the Holy Spirit. But that’s a story for a later talk.

Apart from the uniformed organisations like the BB and the GLB (Girls’ Life Brigade, a title later to be abbreviated to Girls’ Brigade), there were three other weekly opportunities for young people to meet together.

I have already mentioned the teenage Bible Class led by my father on Sunday afternoons, but I also attended the YPF (Young People’s Fellowship) on Friday evenings and Youth Club on Saturday evenings.

YPF was an opportunity for young Christians to meet together to worship the Lord, pray, share testimonies, and learn from the Word. There was also plenty of time for discussion, which was something I particularly enjoyed. It took place in what was called the parlour, which even then was a rather old-fashioned term for a lounge. This was at the back of the church building, right next to the kitchen, so conveniently situated for making hot drinks at the end of the meeting.

The Youth Club was primarily intended to be an opportunity for evangelism. Held in the Youth Hall, part of the church’s property but separate from the main building, it provided facilities for table-tennis, snooker, darts etc. and was followed by a fifteen-minute epilogue which included a hymn, a prayer and a short message.

Looking back on it, I think that, although it was valuable as a means of keeping young people off the streets, Youth Club was not an effective tool of evangelism. Most of the forty or so young people who came to it never came to any of the other church activities and I cannot remember any who became Christians as a result of it.

But that is not to say that such activities can never be effective. Perhaps if it had been led by someone with a clear evangelistic gift the results might have been very different. I was later to learn that for effective evangelism there is no substitute for the power of the Holy Spirit. That is what will attract people to Jesus, and that is what will keep them going on with God. But that’s a subject for later.

Next time I’ll be sharing how at Elm Park Baptist I first dedicated my life to Christ, was baptised, became a church member, started to preach, and felt God calling me to become a minister of the Gospel.

View Details

My Story Talk 5 Brentwood School (1950-1956) Part Two

Welcome to Talk 5 in our series where I’m reflecting on God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Today we’re talking about the academic programme at Brentwood, the chaplain, the chapel and Divinity lessons, and the school CCF.

Academic Programme

A typical day at Brentwood began with chapel or assembly at 8.50am. This lasted about half an hour. Lessons, which were all 45 minutes long, began at 9.30. The first two periods were followed by a 15 minute break at 11am and the next two periods were followed by lunch at 1pm. With the exception of Wednesdays and Saturdays which were dedicated to sporting activities, there were three periods each afternoon, beginning at 1.45 and ending at 4pm.

And then of course there was homework, which at Brentwood was called prep. In the first year this was expected to take us an hour and a half each evening, increasing to three hours when you were in the sixth form taking A levels. This often involved memorizing things on which you were going to be tested the next day.

And there were huge incentives for doing your prep thoroughly. Apart from the fact that you might be put in detention on Wednesday afternoon if you failed the test, a form order was produced every two or three weeks and sent home to your parents to let them know your current position in class. This certainly kept us on our toes, and, although at Brentwood I never came top as I had regularly done at primary school, I made sure I was always in the top 10.

Subjects in our first year, all of which were compulsory, included English, French, Latin, Maths, History, Geography, Physics, Art or Woodwork, Divinity (Religious Education), and Gym. But after the first year, which at Brentwood was referred to as the second form, the system changed and the subjects you took depended on which stream you had chosen to enter.

The Third Form (i.e. the second year) was divided into four streams, Classical Three, Science Three, Modern Three, and General Three. The advantage of this system was that boys could concentrate early on the areas where they hoped to specialise later. The disadvantage was, of course, that not everyone was at all sure at such a young age of what those future areas might be. It also meant that relatively little teaching was given on some quite important subjects. For example, you did relatively little science if you went into the classical stream.

However, in my case, I think the system proved beneficial. I opted for the classical stream because I was interested in languages and had shown that I had a measure of ability in that area. In doing so I was able to begin studying Greek at the age of 12 which was to prove important in what the Lord had for me in the future.

At the age of 15, when we were in the fifth form, we all took O-level exams (General Certificate of Education, Ordinary Level), after which another choice had to be made. Which sixth form stream to enter? Although successful in all my exams, my best results were in languages, and of all the streams available the choice for me was narrowed down to Lower Sixth Classics where I could take Latin, Greek, and Classical History, or Lower Six Arts where the options were Latin or English Literature, French, and German or Mediaeval History. Not knowing then the future God had planned for me, I opted for the Arts stream and chose Latin, French, and Mediaeval History for my A-level subjects and Spanish as a subsidiary subject for O-level.

I thank God that, with his help, I passed all these exams. I was particularly grateful about History. A few months before we were due to sit the exams, my history teacher, Mr. Moulde, said to me,

Quite honestly, Petts, I think you’re going to fail History.

The basic reason for this was that I wasn’t doing enough prep because of all the church activities I was engaged in because, among other things, halfway through my A-level course I had felt God calling me to the ministry. But more about that in the next talk. So, in front of the whole class, I replied,

The problem is, Sir, that I believe that God has called me to be a minister, and that to gain as much experience as I can, I need to be involved as much as possible in my local church. I believe that if I honour God, and if he wants me to pass History, then he will help me to do so.

To which he replied,

Well, Petts, I respect your faith, but I can’t say that I agree with you. Unless you put in a lot more work, you will certainly fail.

I did try to put in more work on History without giving up any of my church activities. When the results came through I was delighted to discover that I had scored 60% (the pass mark being 40). And at the beginning of the next term, as I happened to meet Mr. Moulde in the quad, he said to me with a broad smile,

Well, Petts, what do you mean by getting 60? I would never have believed it. Congratulations.

Later that term I won a scholarship at Brasenose College, Oxford to read Philosophy, Politics and Economics. But more of that in a later talk. I need now to say more about my Christian faith while I was at Brentwood. This, of course, needs to be understood alongside my experience at Elm Park Baptist Church which will be the subject of our next talk. At school I was to get a taste of a different kind of Christianity, some of which wasn’t Christianity at all as I understood it. But this will become clear in a moment.

The Chaplain, the Chapel, and Divinity lessons

The religious climate in the UK in the 1950s was very different from today. Although church attendance had dropped, probably caused by disillusionment because of the war, there was still a general acceptance of the basic truths of Christianity. This, coupled with the fact that religious teaching at Brentwood was, in the words of the school prospectus, in accordance with that of the Church of England, meant that with the exception of Divinity (RE) lessons, apart from one experience I will mention later, there was rarely anything much that would challenge my Christian faith. Surprisingly the source of that challenge was the Chaplain, the Chapel, and what was taught in Divinity lessons.

The Chaplain, the Reverend R. R. Lewis, M.A. was a graduate of Jesus College, Oxford, and an ordained Church of England priest. As such, he was responsible for most of what went on in chapel and taught all the weekly Divinity lessons. From this it was clear, because he openly acknowledged it, that he did not believe in the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, or the resurrection. In fact he denied the possibility of miracles on the grounds that, if God created the laws of the universe, he would not break his own rules! Of course, when I told my father about this, he reminded me of the outstanding miracle experienced by Auntie May which I mentioned at the beginning of this series.

On another occasion we were told that God could not foretell the future because, if he could, that would mean that we could not be held responsible for our actions. I know some Christians do struggle with this, but, as I have pointed out elsewhere, if I know that something will happen it does not mean that I am causing it to happen.

Having said all that, Mr. Lewis was a nice enough man. I just could not, and still cannot, understand how the Church of England can allow people with such views to hold office in the church. Anglicans often talk about what they consider to be the advantages of the C. of E. being what they call a broad church, but in my view what they claim to be its greatest strength is actually its greatest weakness.

Of course, back then I knew nothing of the evangelical wing of the Church of England and tended to assume that Anglicans all held views like those of our school chaplain. It was later at Oxford that I first met godly people who were part of the C. of E. and whose views, apart from the fact that they believed in infant baptism, were much closer to mine.

And I praise God for the great things that are happening today in those parts of the church where the Bible is honoured and charismatic gifts are encouraged. But from my, admittedly limited, experience of Anglican worship, it was very different from that in the 1950s.

Worship in chapel was very different from what I experienced in our Baptist Church each Sunday. Some differences were relatively unimportant. For example, in chapel we sang Psalms instead of reading them, and we knelt for prayer rather than sitting. But others were more serious. Prayers were never spontaneous, but read from a book, and they were the same prayers week after week!

And preachers would be dressed in robes and precede their sermons with,

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen,

something which at times verged on the blasphemous bearing in mind the content of what sometimes followed in the sermon.

But none of this seriously challenged my faith, unlike an experience I had in class, once again with our French teacher, M. Jacquotet. I don’t remember what I had said, but I do remember his response:

Monsieur Petts, you are a silly little fool if you think that, if there is a God, he can possibly be interested in you!

At the time, I had no answer. There is an apparent logic to arguments like these, but I knew that there must be an answer. So that evening I told my father what my teacher had said, to which he replied,

But that is exactly what we Christians dare to believe. God isn’t limited like us. He’s so big that he has the capacity to care about every single person and every single thing in the universe. Your teacher clearly doesn’t understand this.

And I remembered something that we had been told to memorise in our English Literature lessons. It was taken from Matthew 6:26.

Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?

So my father’s advice and the shield of faith, which is the word of God, extinguished yet another of those flaming arrows sent by the evil one (Ephesians 6:16). But my father’s Christian influence on my thinking was also very evident in a decision I made with regard to the school Combined Cadet Force.

The CCF and pacifism

As I mentioned in Talk One, my father was a conscientious objector during the war. As a Christian he took seriously all the teaching of Jesus, and that included the command to Love your enemies (Matthew 5:44) and he could not see how he could obey this command by killing them. He had to go before a tribunal and answer searching questions to test if his objections were genuine and, as a result, was exempted from military service and allowed to continue his profession as a schoolteacher.

Now at Brentwood it was compulsory for boys in the fourth form and above to be part of the school’s Combined Cadet Force (CCF), generally referred to in school as ‘the corps’. This meant that every Thursday boys would dress in Army or Air Force uniform throughout the day and during the last period of the afternoon receive military training on the school playing fields.

There was, however, a provision for a boy to register as a Conscientious Objector if he could satisfy the Headmaster that his objections were sincere. And so, following my father’s example, at the age of 14, I was interviewed and asked to explain my objections, as a result of which I was allowed to do First Aid training with the Red Cross as part of the non-uniformed branch of the corps.

Now I realise that most Christians do not take the same pacifist stance. This is one of those issues where Christians are disagreed, and each person must follow their own conscience in the matter. But for me at the time, arguing for pacificism was in many ways the most vital way I had of expressing my Christian faith. Memories of World War II were still very real and our armed forces were already engaged in conflict in the Korean War from 1950 to 1953. Fear of a third world war was very real, and at the time all boys of eighteen were compelled to do National Service involving two years’ military training in one of the armed forces.

So the issue of whether it is right to take up arms against one’s fellow human beings was particularly relevant throughout my school years, and there were frequent discussions about it both at school and at church.

Whether I was right or wrong to adopt a pacifist position is for others to decide, but what it did for me and the development of my character was undeniable. I was forced to stand up for what I believed in, despite the teasing and accusations of cowardice that inevitably come to people who refuse to fight. The ability to think independently rather than following the majority view, and the resolve to take seriously the teaching of Jesus and to follow it, were to become the determining factors of my life.

So I thank God for my years at Brentwood. They not only provided the foundation for future academic achievements but gave me opportunity to learn how to think for myself and to stand up for what I believe to be right. And, best of all, they were years when I determined to follow Jesus. My faith was both challenged and encouraged, but Brentwood was, of course, by no means the only factor, because throughout my years there I was also a regular attender at Elm Park Baptist Church, which is the subject of the next talk.

View Details

Talk 4 Brentwood School (1950-56) Part One

As I mentioned in the last talk, life for children and young people from Christian families tends to be pretty much dominated by what goes on at school and at church. It was certainly true for me during my years at primary school and continued to be so when I moved on to Brentwood School. Even my recreational activities, in term time at least, took place either at school or in connection with church. So in this talk and the next I’ll be concentrating on my experience at Brentwood School, and I think it will be helpful if I start by talking about:

The educational system in England

Just like today, children left primary school in the July of the school year in which they became eleven. But the school they moved up to depended on their academic ability, which was assessed by their performance in an examination known as ‘the scholarship’ or ‘the eleven plus’, a system which still exists in some areas today.

Only those who were successful in these exams were accepted into what were usually referred to as ‘High Schools’ or ‘Grammar Schools’. (There were no ‘Comprehensive’ schools as we know them today). Children who did not pass the eleven plus would normally go to a ‘Secondary Modern’ school where there would be little or no opportunity later to progress to academic qualifications like GCEs and A levels.

Brentwood, however, came into a different category. It was founded in 1558 as what paradoxically came to be called a public school. Many of the older schools in England come into this category. Well known examples are Eton and Harrow. They were originally called public schools because pupils could attend them regardless of their location, denomination, or family background. However, the term is misleading because, being independent of the state system, they're not actually open to all the public because they charge fees which very few can afford. So how did I come to go to Brentwood?

Gaining admission to Brentwood

It all started with a recommendation from my headmaster at primary school. I remember feeling a bit nervous as I took the eleven plus exams at primary school. I was under pressure because I was aware that so much depended on it, and because everyone was expecting me to pass because each year I had come top of the class. What I didn’t know was that the headmaster, Mr. Occomore, had had his eye on me for some time, and was about to make a recommendation that I think surprised even my parents.

Once I had passed the eleven plus, he contacted my father and suggested that, instead of applying to any of the local high schools or grammar schools, I might try to see if I could get into Brentwood School which, he felt, would offer me an even better standard of education.

To gain admission I would have to go to Brentwood and sit another exam with a view to winning a Foundation Scholarship. Unfortunately there were only six such scholarships available each year. But, after talking it through with me, my parents encouraged me to try. They were no doubt praying that if Brentwood was the best place for me, God would open the door.

And he did. In the week following the exam, Mr Allison, the headmaster at Brentwood, phoned my father and told him that they were prepared to offer me a place, even though I had not come in the first six. I had come seventh! And because Brentwood had accepted me, the Essex Education Committee would cover the cost of the fees. This was because Brentwood was on the Direct Grant List of the Ministry of Education.

Without that, my father would never have been able to afford to pay for me to go to Brentwood where I soon found myself mixing with boys some of whose parents were far wealthier than mine. I am so grateful to God that I grew up at a time when education was available to all, regardless of their family’s income.

First impressions

Life at Brentwood was very different from life at primary school. For one thing, it took much longer to get there. My primary school was only a 10-minute walk away from my home, whereas to get to Brentwood I had to walk to Hornchurch station, catch the number 66 bus into the centre of Hornchurch and then wait for the school bus to arrive. There were only two or three boys who got on at Hornchurch, but the bus picked up about 40 more as it passed through Upminster on the way to Brentwood. The journey took another half an hour to get us to school.

Unlike primary school, all the boys were in uniform. We wore a maroon-coloured cap and a grey suit accompanied by grey socks, black shoes, and a black tie. The rules on uniform were very strict and rather detailed. For example, in the first year it was compulsory to wear short trousers – something which was not uncommon in those days – whereas in the second year it was permissible to wear long trousers and a white shirt. I suppose, like most kids of today, we really couldn't see the point of these apparently trivial regulations.

On arriving at school, we all went straight into Chapel or assembly in the Memorial Hall, depending on which day of the week it was, but more of that next time. Once in class, I was initially surprised by two things. First, the classes were considerably smaller than they had been at primary school where the average class at that time numbered between 40 and 50 pupils. At Brentwood there were only 30. Another surprise was that all the teachers wore gowns. This was a tradition that reflected the fact that they were all university graduates, the majority with MA degrees from Oxford or Cambridge.

At 10.45 each morning there was a 15-minute break when we were able to go to the tuck shop, where we could buy a sticky bun for a penny and drink the third of a pint of milk provided free to all children by the government. This break was a welcome relief from the strict discipline in the classroom where the teacher could administer corporal punishment for something as trivial as not being in your seat before the teacher arrived. But that brings us on to the subject of discipline.

Discipline

I have already mentioned the strict rules about uniform, but there were other minor regulations such as not putting your hands in your pockets, not combing your hair or eating in public.

I well remember the occasion during my first week at Brentwood when I was eating an apple on the pavement outside school while I was waiting for the bus. Suddenly, who should appear but the headmaster himself who approached me and said,

Are you a new boy? And then he added,

Perhaps you don't know that at Brentwood we don't eat in the street. Are you very hungry?

To which I replied, Yes, Sir.

Well perhaps you could put it away now and save it until you get home.

Needless to say, I was very relieved that he had dealt with me so kindly, but I must confess that once I had got upstairs on the bus where the headmaster could not see me, I took the apple out of the bag and ate it.

Of course, it was unusual for the head to be dealing with such a trivial thing. Such matters were usually dealt with by praepostors, a word which comes from the Latin meaning placed ahead and which is roughly equivalent to what in most schools was called a prefect. These were boys chosen from the sixth form and were easily distinguished by the fact that they wore a special tie instead of the regulation black one. They had authority to remind boys of the school rules and to impose discipline, like setting essays for offenders to write, or giving them 100 lines, which meant writing out the same sentence 100 times.

In class, of course, discipline was maintained by the teachers. Most of them achieved this by keeping their lessons interesting, and, as someone pointed out to me when I started teaching, interest is the best form of discipline. Occasionally, however, this was backed up by putting offenders in detention, which meant doing classwork for two hours all Wednesday afternoon instead of playing cricket or football.

This happened to me once, not for breaking any rules, but for not adequately memorising what the teacher had told us to learn for our homework, or ‘prep’ as it was called at Brentwood. Another time I avoided detention by agreeing to be caned instead. It happened like this.

It was during the French lesson, and I was sitting at the back of the class. I had in my head the tune of a chorus we had been singing at church and, rather stupidly, I started to whistle it very quietly. Of course, the teacher heard it and asked who was whistling. Monsieur Jacquotet was an elderly Frenchman who was bald on top but had white woolly hair at the back and sides. But what made his appearance rather unusual was the fact that he wore pince-nez glasses, something we boys found highly amusing.

When he asked who was whistling I immediately put up my hand to confess, which, I think, anyone else in our school would have done. To which Jacko (as we somewhat disrespectfully called him) imposed my sentence:

Eh bien, Monsieur Petts, you will go in detention.

However, there was one problem. I was opening bat for the house cricket team and there was a match on the next day. So the team captain went to our housemaster, Lt. Col, D.J Jones, and asked him if he could get me off detention. As a result of which, M. Jacquotet agreed, provided that Col. Jones gave me the cane instead. So that afternoon, with a rather sore backside, feeling something of a hero, I went out to bat for the house team. Sadly, I was out first ball, and my heroic suffering proved in vain!

Sport

One of the things that first excited me about Brentwood was the wonderful facilities on campus – though ‘campus’ was not a term that was used in England in those days. The school boasted the largest school playing fields in England, some 60 acres, enough space for the entire school to be out playing football or cricket at the same time. There were also tennis courts, squash courts, a fives court, two well equipped gyms and an open-air swimming pool where, in the Summer Term, we were all taught to swim.

Initially there had been one thing that had disappointed me about Brentwood. We had to go to school on Saturdays! This may have been because about 180 of the boys were boarders and the headmaster once remarked that he viewed ‘dayboys’ as ‘boarders who go home to sleep’! Something which is clearly a contradiction in terms, and I confess, we dayboys refused to take it seriously when we were told that we should wear school uniform on Sundays!

However, I soon got over my disappointment about going to school on Saturdays, as the whole afternoon on Wednesdays and Saturdays was dedicated to sporting activities, which I loved, and anyway our school holidays were longer than those in other schools – eight weeks in the summer, for example, instead of the usual six.

I enjoyed playing football and cricket and, later, rugby. I remember playing left wing for my house team and, on one occasion, scoring 7 goals while my friend John Bramble on the right wing scored another 7. This absurd result was probably because the opposing team was from one of the boarding houses which had fewer boys to choose from than the dayboy houses. This may also account for the fact that in one cricket match I took 4 wickets for the loss of only 1 run! I also played full back in our house rugby team which won the cup for three years in succession, probably because Col. Jones our housemaster was a former Welsh international and an excellent coach.

And finally, in the sixth form, I played centre half at football in the school second eleven and was hoping to be promoted to the first eleven until I badly sprained my ankle running down the stairs of the school library two at a time and was out of action until I left school at the end of that term.

Next time I’ll tell you something about the academic programme at Brentwood before sharing how my Christian faith was both tested and encouraged during my time there.

View Details

My Story Talk 3 Home, Family, Christmas & Holidays (1947-1953)

Welcome to Talk 3 in our series where I’m reflecting on the goodness of God throughout my life. From what I've said so far it’s clear that after the war my life in the 1940s was largely comprised of school and church. I suppose that was true of most Christian children in those days and continues to be so today. And what was true of my years at primary school and Sunday school was also true of the years that followed. Most of my activity was to be centred on school and church.

But before I move on to those things in the next talk, I need to say more about my family, because without a doubt our family is by far the strongest influence in the formation of our character, our behaviour, and our outlook on life. And life is not just about our education or work or church. It’s about relationships, people, recreation, having fun, and healthy enjoyment of the things God has so graciously lavished upon us. So this talk is about my home, my family, Christmas and holidays.

Home

For the first 23 years of my life I lived with my parents in the home in Hornchurch where I was born. It was a fairly standard three bedroomed semidetached house, but it benefited from a rather large garden which backed onto the railway. We weren’t disturbed by the noise of the trains because the garden was some 200 feet – about 60 metres – long, but by walking to the end of the garden and looking down the railway embankment we could watch electric trains on the District Line and the steam locomotives on the London, Midland and Scottish Railway.

My parents were both keen gardeners and had chosen the house because of the size of the garden. They planted several apple trees, two pear trees, two plum trees, a greengage tree, as well as strawberries, raspberries, gooseberries, blackcurrants and redcurrants. My grandfather had also planted for me an ash tree at the very end of the garden and, by looking at Google Earth, it looks as though it’s still there today. Sadly, the large fishpond which I helped my father build when I was about ten seems to have gone.

Family and Friends

One of the advantages of having a large garden was that there was a big enough lawn for my father to teach me to play cricket and football. So, although I was an only child, I was never a lonely child. There were always plenty of friends who liked to come and play.

I also enjoyed playing board games with my grandad, my mother’s father, who lived with us for about five years, and later with my grandmother, my father’s mother, who came later to live with us for six years and who died at the age of 86 when I was 16. Having elderly parents living with us for eleven years was not easy for my mother, but she seldom if ever complained, and her example taught me the real meaning of love, a commitment to serving others despite the cost to ourselves. I also got some idea of what it’s like to be in your eighties!

Family at Christmas

I saw relatively little of other family members as my uncles, aunts and ten cousins all lived too far away for frequent visits. But we did see most of them at Christmas and sometimes during the other school holidays. Because, with one exception, all my cousins were older than I was, Christmas was usually spent with my Auntie Addie – Adelaide actually, but I never heard anyone actually call her that! She was a year or two younger than my mother and had two sons, Brian who was a year older than me, and Geoffrey who was born shortly after the war when Uncle Bert returned from years away fighting in Burma (now known as Myanmar).

We usually alternated where we would spend Christmas, either at our house in Hornchurch or at their prefab in Woodford Green near Walthamstow. Prefabs were prefabricated bungalows introduced after the war to provide housing that could be erected more quickly than by using the usual methods of construction. Originally they were intended to last for, I think, only ten years, but in practice most of them lasted for decades. One of the exciting things about them was that they were all provided with a fridge with a small freezer compartment, so we could have ice-cream whenever we liked. Fridges were a luxury in those days and it was many years later that we ourselves had one. Eileen and I had our first fridge in 1968, six years after we were married.

Brian and I had to share a bed every Christmas and I have vivid memories of waking up in the early hours of the morning to see what Santa had left in our ‘stockings’ – which were actually pillowcases, as stockings weren’t large enough to accommodate the vast number of presents we each received.

I don’t remember how old I was when I realised that Santa wasn’t real, but it must have been well before I left primary school. I do know that some Christians, quite understandably, believe it’s wrong to tell their children something which isn’t true, fearing especially that, when they finally understand that the whole Santa thing is a myth, they will conclude the Christmas story found in the Bible is a legend too.

That’s a view that I understand and fully respect, but I can only say that it was never a problem for me, or, as far as I know, for my children and grandchildren for that matter. If we teach our children that what is in the Bible is true, they will soon discover that Father Christmas is nowhere to be found in the Bible, but is just a nice story that, although it isn’t true, gave them a lot of fun when they were too young to understand otherwise. But each of us must follow our own conscience in this matter, as we always must when confronted with issues over which Christians disagree.

Christmas dinner, as I remember it, was very similar to what most people have today, with one notable exception. I can’t remember when we first had turkey, but for several years our celebratory meal was roast chicken. Unlike today, chicken was then very expensive, and Christmas was the only time we had it. At other times our regular Sunday roast was lamb, which, also unlike today, was the cheapest meat you could get.

Our typical weekly menu was roast lamb on Sundays, cold lamb on Mondays, minced lamb in the form of shepherd’s pie on Tuesdays, and lamb stew with dumplings on Wednesdays. So chicken at Christmas was a real treat!

Apart from eating, we spent most of Christmas Day and Boxing Day playing with the games we had received as presents. These were always very competitive and included subuteo football, a form of cricket you could also play on the table, table tennis, darts, and a bagatelle pin board. We also enjoyed heading a balloon to one another and counting how many times we could keep it up. When we later tried it outside with a football we found it was much harder!

Another good thing about staying at Auntie Addie’s house was that we were able to visit other family members, as three of my aunts lived quite near to her. There was always quite a crowd in the evenings when we all joined together for a party, when we played traditional party games like musical chairs and pass the parcel.

Years later I was to discover that some people's idea of a party was a time when you did little more than sit around and drink too much. This shocked me because our parties had never been like that. My parents were both teetotallers and, although most of the rest of the family were not, they respected their wishes and rarely drank in the presence of children and teenagers.

Of course, the consumption of alcohol is another of those matters where Christians disagree, but hopefully all would at least agree that abstinence is the best policy in the presence of those who might become addicted. I personally think of myself as an abstainer, but not a total abstainer. And I’m grateful that, because of the example set by my family, I have always been cautious in these matters and am happy to say that I have never been drunk, something which even some Christians find hard to believe.

Family and Holidays

But Christmas was not the only time when I met other family members. There were the summer holidays too. Hotels were too expensive, and we usually spent a couple of weeks away from home staying with family. During my primary school years we went several times to Cowes on the Isle of Wight where my father’s sister, Auntie Lil, had a flat overlooking the sea.

Her husband, Uncle Ernie, was a lighthouse keeper on the Needles, an impressive rock formation just offshore at the western end of the island. His job required him to live on the lighthouse for several weeks at a time, so sometimes we never saw him at all during the weeks we were on holiday with Auntie Lil. But when he was able to be with us, I remember that he was very generous.

We usually had to travel everywhere by bus, but on one occasion he paid for a taxi to take us on a tour of the whole island. Another time, when I was eight, he paid for my father and me to go on a ‘joy-ride’, a five minute trip on an aeroplane, an Auster light aircraft with just enough room for Dad and me to sit behind the pilot. I realise that this might not sound very exciting to young people today. Plane travel is so common, and many families take flights abroad for their holidays. But in those days it really was something exceptional. No one in my class at school had ever been in a plane, and my teacher got me to tell them all what it was like. We had only gone up to 1000 feet, but the experience of flying was exhilarating as we looked down on houses that now looked no bigger than a matchbox and were able to see so far into the distance, across to the southern coast of England and beyond.

I’m so grateful to Uncle Ernie for making that experience possible for me. (It cost him seven shillings and sixpence which was a lot of money in those days, but which in today’s decimal currency equates to 37.5p). Due to his kindness and Auntie Lil’s hospitality we always enjoyed our holidays on the Isle of Wight.

Another favourite holiday destination, particularly during my early teens, was Canterbury where my mother’s sister, another Auntie Lil, lived with her husband Will and her daughter Doreen who was an English teacher in a Grammar School. I remember listening to her discussions with my dad about the nature of language, something I was particularly interested in because by then I was already studying French, Latin, and Greek at school. But more of that later.

While in Canterbury we enjoyed visiting its wonderful cathedral and other places of historical interest like the Westgate Tower and the ducking stool where in less enlightened centuries women who scolded their husbands were ducked in the river to teach them a lesson! We also took advantage of the beautiful countryside around Canterbury and particularly enjoyed walking across the golf course which immediately overlooked my aunt’s back garden.

Other days were spent taking bus trips to the coastal resorts that lay within easy reach of Canterbury – places like Herne Bay, Margate, and Ramsgate, all lovely places, but nothing of course to compare with the beauty of Devon where I now live! My first holiday in Devon was when I was fifteen – but that’s something I’ll come back to next time when I talk about my teenage years at church and my life at Brentwood School where I was privileged by God’s grace to receive a first-class education.

But finally, I’m conscious that in this talk I’ve made little mention of God, but I’m reminded that in the book of Esther God isn’t mentioned either, yet it’s very clear as we read it that he was at work in every detail of the story. So it is with us. His purpose for each of us is different, but he is at work in the ordinary everyday things in our lives, not just in any miracles he may perform for us.

So I thank God for the home I grew up in, the family I was part of, and the fun we had together at Christmas and on holiday. These things, I believe, played an important part in my childhood and teenage years enabling me to grow into adulthood, confident to face the future, knowing that God loved me and had a purpose for my life.

View Details

Talk 2 School, Sunday School, & Salvation

Welcome to Talk 2 in our new series where I’m reflecting on my how the Lord has blessed my life. Today I’ll be talking about my time at Primary School, at Sunday School, and how I learnt at the age of eight how to be saved.

Suttons Lane County Primary School

My first school was situated on Suttons Lane, quite close to Hornchurch aerodrome. On the edge of town, to the south it had open views of the fairly flat countryside on the northern side of the River Thames. It was less than a ten-minute walk from my house.

From an early age I was able to walk to school unattended as there were no roads to cross thanks to ‘the cinder track’, a footpath that ran along the edge of what we called ‘the farmer’s field’ where we would see horses pulling a plough to prepare the soil for the potatoes that were grown there.

Every day at school began with the teacher marking the register followed by assembly in the school hall where we sang a hymn, said the Lord’s Prayer together, and listened to any announcements the headmaster had to give us. I don’t know how many of our teachers were practising Christians, but the emphasis in assembly was distinctly Christian, as was the teaching in the weekly Scripture – later to be called Religious Education – lessons we had in class.

In those days it was a legal requirement for all schools to include Scripture on the curriculum and for each day to begin with an act of Christian worship. So the Christian teaching I received at home and at Sunday School was reinforced by what went on at school. The truth of the Christian message was still widely assumed, even if church attendance had greatly diminished as a result of the war. How different things are today!

I can see with hindsight that, although I didn’t realise it at the time, one of the reasons I enjoyed school was that there was no conflict between what I was taught at home and what I was taught at school.

And, of course, I enjoyed it too because, unlike some schools today that have misguidedly sold off their playing fields for commercial purposes, our school shared a playing field with the adjacent secondary school, where we played cricket and football, both of which were probably my favourite activities.

I played for the school team at both cricket and football, the love of which I inherited from my father who on Saturdays was an active player in both. I loved going to watch him play for the Elm Park Football Club and the Cranham Cricket Club.

He once told me he thought that the boys in the secondary school where he taught paid more attention to his Scripture lessons because he also taught them to play football. He was a qualified F.A. Coach, and, incidentally, also told me that one of the boys he had coached played in the England team that won the World Cup in 1966. I still have a box full of medals he won for cricket, football, snooker, and tennis. He was seven times the champion of the Elm Park Lawn Tennis Club.

But I think I also enjoyed school because I was good at my lessons. As I’ve already mentioned, I started school at the age of 4 in September 1943. Educationally I had the distinct advantage that my father was a teacher and had taught me to read and write before I went to school, and so by the time I was 7 my parents were told that I had a reading age of 12.

In saying this I hope I don’t give the impression that I’m boasting. I learnt long ago that true humility is not a matter of pretending that you don’t really have any talents or gifts, but acknowledging that what you do have comes from God, and that all the credit is his and not ours. If I have a good brain, it is God who gave me that brain, and I have no right to boast about my academic achievements. But that does not mean that I may not mention them! As God said to Jeremiah:

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations (Jeremiah 1:5).

Before we were born, God had a purpose for each one of us, and he created us with the abilities we would need to fulfil that purpose. It’s our decision as to whether we fulfil that purpose or not. So I thank God for the good brain he gave me and for parents who encouraged me to use it.

And if I tell you that every year I attended that school I came top of the class, you’ll understand that my reason for doing so is to show how, without my realising it, he was guiding me onto a pathway where academic achievement would be an essential part of the work that he had planned for me to do.

Sunday School and Church

But school was not the only place I was learning. Probably the most influential source in my education was what my parents taught me at home. But more of that in a moment. I was also learning at Sunday School and at other church related activities like Lifeboys (the name then given to the junior section of the Boys’ Brigade).

My first reaction to Sunday School was that I didn’t like it! I was only 4 and I’m grateful to my parents that when I told them so they did not force me to go. A little later they suggested very gently that I might like to try it again, and this time I enjoyed it. Because of the wisdom they showed in this matter, I always knew that attendance at Sunday School or Church was to be my decision. No one could ever say that I only went because my parents made me go.

And so I went of my own free will, and year after year was given a book as a prize for good attendance. The annual Sunday School Prize Giving Sunday was a big event, and many of the parents who were not church-goers came to see their children receive their prizes.

Sunday School, which in most churches took place in the afternoon, was a big thing in the 1940s and 1950s. Even parents who did not come to church wanted their children to be taught about the Bible – or they were just glad to get a break from the kids on a Sunday afternoon! We were told that our church had the largest Sunday School in Essex with up to 400 children attending each Sunday. My mother was a Sunday School teacher and my father taught the teenage Bible Class, but more of that in the next talk.

Unlike most of the children who attended Sunday School, I also attended church. I think my first experience of church was travelling on a Sunday evening up to London to attend the church where my parents had attended before the war. We travelled on the London Underground railway on the District Line between Elm Park and Bromley stations, and I took an instant dislike to London because at that time much of that area was damaged, dirty, and quite smelly.

The Tab which formerly, I was told, had up to a thousand in its congregation, had been bombed in the war and, as far as I know was never rebuilt. Many of the people’s houses had been destroyed and, rather like my parents, they had moved away from the East End of London. Consequently the meetings I went to as a young child with my parents were attended by at most a few dozen people and took place in the upstairs room of a pub, which I seem to remember was called The Five Bells.

The meetings weren’t really suitable for children, and I didn’t really enjoy the fuss that all the adults made of me. One thing I did like was the minister, Mr Tildsley, referring to me as King David and perhaps that sparked in my young heart a desire to copy my namesake and achieve great victories for God.

Fortunately, as far as I was concerned, my parents soon decided that it was time to settle into a church that was nearer to where they were now living, so we started attending Elm Park Baptist which was a relatively new church as most of the houses in the area, like ours, had only been constructed in the mid to late 1930s.

It was a warm friendly church with lots of activities for children and young people and, although I couldn’t understand all that the minister said in his sermons on Sunday evenings, it’s clear, looking back on it, that it was all influencing my mind in the right direction, leading me ultimately in my teens to give my life to Jesus. But that’s a subject for our next talk. However, before we get there, it’s important that I tell you how, at the age of 8, I came to understand how to be sure I would go the Heaven when I die.

The way of salvation

I remember how, at the age of 8, I was sitting on my father's knee when I asked him,

Daddy, how good do you have to be to go to Heaven?

I think the question was on my mind because of something that was called David's Good Boy Chart. This was a chart my father had made rather like a calendar with a space for each day for him to stick on it a coloured sun or moon or star, depending on how my behaviour had been that day.

I think he had made it because my mother had been having some problems with me during the day while he was at work. When he got home, my mother would tell him how I had behaved that day and an appropriate sticker would be applied to the chart. If I'd been good, it would be a sun, not so good, a moon, and so on.

I think I must have been wondering how many suns I would need if I wanted to go to Heaven! My father explained that it isn’t a question of how good we are, because none of us is good enough to go to heaven. That's why Jesus came to die on the cross to take the punishment for our sins so that all who believe in him will have everlasting life.

Then he asked,

Do you believe that, David?

I replied,

Yes, of course I do.

And why do you believe it? asked my father.

Because you have told me, I said.

That's a good reason, he said, but one day you will come to believe it for yourself.

I used to be concerned about this, especially when so many Christians can remember a specific date. But then I heard an illustration that was very helpful. I never forgot, and will never forget, the date when Eileen and I married. But even if one year I had forgotten it, I would never have forgotten that I was married and who I was married to!

The point of the illustration is this. The date that my married relationship with Eileen started was relatively unimportant compared with our relationship throughout our married lives. The same applies to our relationship with Jesus. What matters is not when our relationship started, but whether I am in relationship with him now. Am I trusting him now for the forgiveness of my sins and my home in heaven? And if I am, then the exact date it all started is relatively unimportant.

So I cannot remember an exact date when I first believed but I can remember the day when I decided to give my life to Christ. And again, it was through my father that I came to that decision. But we'll come to that in a later talk.

View Details

My Story Talk 1 Family Background and World War 2

Introduction

Welcome back to Great Bible Truths with me, Dr David Petts. As this podcast will go out live in early January let me take this opportunity to wish you God’s richest blessings for the coming year. Let me also apologise that my website was down for several weeks, but the good news is that it’s now up and running again.

Now, as I mentioned in my last talk at the end of our series on Mark’s Gospel, this year, God willing, I’m planning both to write and record my memoirs in order to place on record God’s goodness throughout my life, from the moment of conception in my mother’s womb, right through to this present time. I also hope that the things I record may be of some historical and sociological interest, particular to younger people.

What’s more, I’m convinced that, if he can bless me, he can bless you too, and my purpose in doing this is to encourage your faith, if you are already a Christian, and, if you’re not, to persuade you that, if you put your trust in Christ as your personal Saviour, you will discover how trustworthy and faithful he is.

Some of God’s miraculous interventions in my life have already been recorded in some of my books, notably in Signs from Heaven – why I Believe and The Voice of God – how he speaks to us today. But there’s still so much more to tell, and friends and family have been encouraging me that now is the time to get on and do it. And, even more importantly, I feel that God himself is prompting me to do so.

Now you may be wondering why I am including talks about my personal experience under the general heading of Great Bible Truths. That’s an understandable question, but the answer is simply that as Christians our lives are meant to illustrate and demonstrate how the truth of God’s Word works out in practice. In 2 Corinthians 3:2 Paul talks about the Corinthians themselves as a letter… known and read by everyone. And, although in the context Paul is talking about his readers as the living proof of his apostolic ministry, there seems to be here an underlying principle that our lives are, or at least should be, living testimonies to the truth we believe.

And finally, by way of introduction, I need to say that I am very well aware that, again in the words of the apostle Paul, By the grace of God, I am what I am (1 Corinthians 15:10). Whatever we are, whatever we have done, whatever gifts and talents we may have, it’s all by the grace of God. And all the glory must always go to him. But now to my story.

My parents

My story, of course, begins with my parents. Stanley and Ivy Petts (née Claus) were both born in Poplar, East London, in September 1907. Their home backgrounds were very different. Mum’s childhood was very difficult, her father often coming home drunk. Her mother died before I was born. She left six children, two boys, Harry and Bill, and four girls, Minnie, Lily, Ivy, and Addie. As far as I know, only Minnie and my mum, Ivy, ever became Christians.

On the other hand, my dad’s family were all Christians attending the Poplar and Bromley Baptist Tabernacle, affectionately known as The Tab, and it was there that my dad met my mum. Dad had three sisters, Lily, Violet, and May. May was born deaf and dumb – that’s how it’s recorded on the national register – but, as I’ve already recorded in my book Signs from Heaven, was miraculously healed in answer to prayer .

When she was in her twenties, my grandmother took her to a divine healing meeting conducted by the evangelist, George Jeffreys , who placed his hands on her and prayed for her.

That evening, as they were travelling home to Poplar in the East End of London, they went down to catch the underground train. Suddenly, with a shocked expression on her face, May put both hands over her ears. She could hear the roar of the train as it came through the tunnel approaching the platform!

Until that moment, from the day she was born she had never been able to hear, but now she could hear, and within a few weeks was beginning to speak.

I suppose that’s why I’ve never doubted God’s miracle working power and firmly believe that we should expect to see miracles today.

Mum and Dad were married on August 4th 1934 and lived with his parents until they were able to afford a home of their own. During the time they were there, my mother sadly had a miscarriage and, as my father told me years later, the doctor had expressed the opinion that she might be unable to have children. But they prayed that, in my mother’s words, the Lord would give her a son, and that he would go into all the world and preach the gospel. But I knew nothing of all this until I was sixteen when I told my parents that I believed that God was calling me to serve him as a minister.

In 1937 Mum and Dad moved into their own home, a new-build semi-detached house in Hornchurch, which, with the help of a mortgage, they were able to purchase for the princely sum of – wait for it – £630 (six hundred and thirty pounds)! Prices for similar properties in the same area today are closer to £630,000!

I was born in the front bedroom of that house on January 12th 1939, and my late wife Eileen was born 6 days earlier in Stockport, Cheshire. That was just eight months before Britain declared war on Germany on 3rd September 1939. Of course, I was too young to remember very much of the early years of the war, but I was already 6 years old when the war ended and have just a few memories of what life was like at the time.

Earliest Memories

During the first part of the war, between 1939 and 1941, because Hornchurch was an area that was likely to be bombed, my mother and I were evacuated to a village called Marcham (near to Abingdon). We stayed in a vicarage with the vicar and his wife (Rev and Mrs Palmer). I have no clear memories of that time, although I do remember the vicarage, from when we went back to visit them after the war.

My father wasn’t with us for much of the time because, although he was not in the armed forces as he was a conscientious objector, he was sent as a schoolteacher to what was called an Approved School (which was where they used to send juvenile delinquents). It was a residential establishment near Woking in Surrey and my dad had to live there much of the time, so we didn't see much of him as it was some distance from where we were in Marcham, and in those days very few people had cars.

In 1941 my father was transferred to a different Approved School. This was nearer to Hornchurch and so my mother and I left Marcham and returned home to be nearer to my father. However, our house was less than half a mile from Hornchurch aerodrome, which played a very important part in the Battle of Britain. So there was still a very real danger of being bombed by enemy aircraft.

My main memories of those early years were having to take refuge in an air-raid shelter whenever the siren sounded. (The siren gave a very loud signal when enemy aircraft were approaching and a different signal called the ‘all-clear’ when the danger was over). There were two kinds of shelter, the Morrison shelter and the Anderson shelter.

We had a Morrison shelter which was like a very strong table, made of steel, which you had indoors. I can remember having to go underneath it at night when the siren sounded – we slept on the floor underneath it. I can also remember banging my head on it as I was getting out from underneath it! All the houses had to have ‘blackouts’ to cover the windows at night so that enemy aircraft would not see the light in the house.

I remember my mum peeping out from behind the blackout during one of the raids and telling me that she could see a Spitfire chasing off a German plane. I can’t remember ever feeling afraid. Perhaps it was because I was too young to understand the danger, but also because of my mum’s confidence that God would keep us safe.

Other people had Anderson shelters. These were in the garden, dug into the ground, and made of corrugated iron – rather like some of the things pig farmers use to shelter their pigs today. The infant school I went to from the age of four in September 1943 had a large version of one of these which was big enough for all the children to get into if there was a raid during school-time. I can only remember going into it once but can’t remember much more about it.

Quite recently, however, I discovered that an enemy aircraft had crashed into the secondary school which was only about 100 yards from my infant school, and I have wondered if this had coincided with the time we were all in the air raid shelter. Of course, I have no way of knowing this, but I am so grateful that our lives were spared throughout that awful time when so many others lost theirs.

When the war ended, all over the country people held parties in the street to celebrate. (There were not many cars around in those days!) I remember we had a big bonfire in the middle of the road – something which I imagine would not be allowed today – and the concrete was broken up where the bonfire had been.

My final memory of the war and the years that followed it is what was called ‘rationing’. Because there was a great shortage of food and clothing during that time people were given ration books with coupons in. To buy something (including sweets!) you needed not only money, but coupons. I remember my mum being pleased with me because I had bigger feet than most of the children. It meant she was allowed extra clothing coupons! The rationing went on for some time after the war and I well remember the first time we were allowed to buy as many sweets as we liked because there was no more rationing!

But now it’s time to finish for today, so let’s summarise by asking what Bible truths have been illustrated by the experiences I have been talking about. The first of these truths is that God answers believing prayer. Despite what she had been told, my mother prayed for a son, and God answered her prayer. Secondly, nothing is impossible with God. There was no medical cure for my aunt’s condition, but God worked a miracle in response to the evangelist’s prayer. This shows us, thirdly, that God still grants supernatural gifts like healing as signs confirming the truth of the gospel. We also see that God has a purpose for our lives and that he is able to protect us from danger in order to fulfil it.

Next time I’ll be talking about the years after the war, my time at primary school, and my first experience of Sunday school and going to church.

View Details

Talk 48 Mark 16:1-20 The Resurrection and Great Commission

Welcome to Talk 48 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. This will be the final talk in the series, and we’ll be looking at Chapter 16 which is Mark’s account of Jesus’ resurrection and his final instructions to his disciples which are often referred to as The Great Commission. We'll work through the chapter a verse or two at a time, and will begin by reading verses 1-4.

When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. 2 Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3 and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?" 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away.

Verses 1-2

In our last talk we commented on the devotion of these and many other women who had faithfully followed Jesus right from the beginning of his ministry in Galilee. Now we see them buying spices to anoint Jesus’ body. What they did not know was that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus had already done so when they buried him in accordance with Jewish burial customs (John 19:40), and that by the time they were to reach the tomb Jesus would have already risen. But of course, like the rest of the disciples, they were not expecting him to rise despite all that Jesus had told them. If they had been, they would have known that to anoint his body would be completely unnecessary!

Verse 3

The stone which Joseph put in place would have been in a sloping groove down which he had rolled the stone to cover the entrance to the tomb. The two Marys had seen him do this (15:47) and now, on the way to the tomb, realised that unaided they would be unable to move it back. Why hadn’t they thought of this before? When we are grieving we don’t always think as clearly as usual and now the women are anticipating a problem which, as they were soon to discover, would not be a problem at all! The Lord had already dealt with it!

Verse 4

Have you ever set out to do something for the Lord which you felt sure he wanted you to do, and then discovered that you’d got it wrong? Or perhaps, as you’ve set out to do it, doubts have come into your mind, unforeseen potential problems have occurred to you, and you’ve wondered how you could possibly achieve your goal. That’s certainly been my experience, and that exactly what was happening with these women. Their motivation was pure. What they were doing they were doing out of love for the Lord. But their mistake – if it was a mistake – was that, like the rest of the disciples, they didn’t remember or didn’t believe what Jesus had said. Was the Lord displeased with their actions? Surely not. As we see in the next few verses, they were given the great privilege of announcing the news of the resurrection to the other disciples. Even when we get things wrong, the Lord still has work for us to do.

Now let’s read verses 5-8:

5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 "Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.'" 8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

I want you to notice the extreme emotions experienced by the women in these verses. This is completely understandable. They were grieving – over the terrible suffering they had so recently seen inflicted on someone they so dearly loved – over the fact, or what they thought was a fact, that all their hopes for the future had been dashed – over the loss of a loved one. As we have seen, they are not thinking clearly. They are wondering who can have moved the stone. They enter the tomb and are confronted by an angel! No wonder they’re alarmed, trembling and bewildered.

But grieving can bring with it other emotions too, as I have recently discovered in my own experience. I’ve found that we can weep tears of sorrow and, paradoxically, tears of joy too. And I’ve experienced both at the same time! And there’s a hint in verse 8 that that is what these women were experiencing too. The word translated bewildered in the Greek is ekstasis. It can also mean astonishment or amazement. But interestingly, in Matthew’s account he uses a different word, chara, which means joy!

And where does this joy come from? It comes from the news the angel brings them – Jesus is not here. He has risen! What a consolation that was to become! And it’s our consolation too. Because he lives, we shall live also. And our loved ones who die in the Lord are not here. They are with Christ, which is far better. And the day will come when we will see them again, as these devoted women soon were to see Jesus.

Perhaps it’s this strange mixture of emotions that can account for the fact that, despite the good news, the women fled from the tomb and said nothing to anyone because they were afraid. This was presumably just their initial reaction, because verse 9 tells us Mary Magdalene, at least, went and told the good news to the other disciples. And according to the angel’s instructions, that was to include Peter. If, as is widely believed, Mark derived his information from Peter, it’s perhaps significant that Peter gets a special mention here. It was Peter who had denied the Lord and who in John 21 is graciously given the opportunity to reaffirm his love for Jesus. Even when we fail him, the Lord is constantly seeking to draw us back to himself.

But that, according to the earliest manuscripts is where Mark’s Gospel abruptly ends. Verses 9-20 are viewed by some scholars as a later addition. But these verses have for a long time formed part of Scripture as we know it and, as we shall see, the basic truth contained in them is confirmed elsewhere in the New Testament.

So now, verses 9-11.

9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.

The fact that Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene is confirmed in all four Gospels, although as usual the other Gospels give more details than we find in Mark. Although initially afraid to say anything (v8), possibly due to emotional trauma, she has now gained the courage to do so. And if we read John’s account the reason is clear. She has seen the Lord. He has spoken to her. He has called her by name. The encounter with Jesus makes all the difference. She goes and tells the other disciples that she has seen him. Bearing in mind the repeated lack of faith exhibited by the disciples throughout Jesus’ ministry, we’re not surprised that at first they did not believe her.

This unbelief is stressed again in verses 12-14:

12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13 These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either. 14 Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

Of course, verses 12-13 are a very brief summary of Luke 24:13-35 where Jesus appears to the two disciples on the Road to Emmaus, and where Jesus appearing to the Eleven follows immediately afterwards. We sometimes blame Thomas because he refused to believe until he saw for himself (John 20:24-28), but it seems that the other disciples were no less guilty, and Jesus’ words to Thomas were applicable to them all – Because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed. And the importance of believing is stressed in the following verses where faith is the essential prerequisite for salvation and for seeing miracles performed in Jesus’ name.

Verses 15-18

15 He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

Now that Jesus has died and risen again, the work he had come to do has been accomplished. The Lamb of God has been slain to take away the sins of the world. He has borne the punishment that our sins deserved, and forgiveness and salvation are available to all who will believe. That’s good news indeed and all the world needs to hear it. The disciples, and all disciples after them, are to go and spread the message to all creation.

But why creation? Because, as Paul teaches us in Romans 8:21-22, all creation was affected by Adam’s sin and all creation has been groaning right up to this present time and is waiting to be liberated from its bondage to decay. For that we must wait until Jesus returns, when the entire creation will see the manifestation of the victory he accomplished at Calvary. Forgiveness of sin and eternal life are available right now to all who will believe, but the final outworking of Christ’s victory at Calvary, the abolition of sickness and death, the redemption of our bodies, the new heavens and the new earth, are all future blessings for which we must patiently wait.

But even now God grants us foretastes of those blessings through the miracle-working power of the Spirit. Most of the miracles Jesus promises in these verses are seen again and again in the Book of Acts. The Spirit-filled disciples drive out demons, speak languages they have never learnt, and heal the sick in Jesus’ name. Paul was even delivered from snakebite. The only miracle listed here that is not mentioned in Acts is drinking deadly poison. And these miracle signs were not just for the early church. William Burton records in his book Signs Following examples of all these miracles taking place in the early days of the Congo Evangelistic Mission.

But that does not mean that the Lord Jesus intended us to claim these signs as promises. What he is saying is that these are the kind of miracles we can expect when we go out to proclaim the good news. Spiritual gifts are distributed as the Holy Spirit determines (1 Corinthians 12:11). Our responsibility is to tell others about Jesus and to trust the Holy Spirit to confirm what we say with whatever kind of sign he chooses.

Verses 19-20

19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20 Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

In Mark’s Gospel verses 15-20 are the last recorded words of Jesus before he returned to Heaven. Luke’s Gospel and the first chapter of Acts (which gives a little more detail about Jesus’ ascension into Heaven) records his last words as telling his disciples to wait until they are baptised in the Spirit and that they would receive power when the Spirit came upon them and be his witnesses to the ends of the earth. There is, of course no contradiction here. The power of the Spirit was, and still is, essential if miracles are to happen in Jesus’ name.

The message that Jesus is alive is confirmed by the fact that he is still working miracles today. He is still seated at God’s right hand. All authority is his on earth as it is in Heaven. It’s with that authority that, in the words of Matthew’s Gospel, we go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. He will work with us, if we will only go and tell.

As I have already said, this is the final talk in our series on Mark. In January, God willing, I will begin a new series which will take the form of personal testimonies to God’s goodness to me throughout my life. Meanwhile, some 300 podcasts of my teaching remain available.

View Details

Talk 47 Mark 15:40-47 The Burial of Jesus

Welcome to Talk 47 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. We have now reached Mark 15:40. Today we’ll be concentrating on Jesus’ burial and, as we do so, we’ll take time to note the importance of the certification of his death and of the key roles played by Joseph of Arimathea and women like Mary Magdalene. Next time, which will be our final talk in this series, we’ll be looking at Mark’s account of the resurrection and the Great Commission.

As we proceed we will take time to stress the importance of each of these historical facts without getting involved with relatively minor issues like the apparent differences in the Gospel accounts, or whether, as some have argued, Jesus was actually crucified on the Thursday, rather than, as is traditionally taught, on what we know as Good Friday. Such discussion is generally unproductive.

As far as any differences in the accounts are concerned, I have already pointed out in my book, You’d Better Believe It, that the Schofield Bible offers an explanation of how the different accounts of Christ’s resurrection appearances can be reconciled. What’s more, any such differences actually strengthen the case for the resurrection as they suggest that there was no collaboration between the four writers. And does it really matter what day he was crucified? Surely what matters is that Christ died for our sins… was buried… and rose again. This, says Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, is the essence of the gospel.

So, over these two final talks, we’ll take the text of Mark’s Gospel as we have it and consider Jesus’ burial, the confirmation of his death, his resurrection, and his last instructions to his disciples.

We’ll begin today by reading verses 42-47:

42 It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening approached, 43 Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. 44 Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. 45 When he learned from the centurion that it was so, he gave the body to Joseph. 46 So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. 47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.

We’ll start with the confirmation of Jesus’ death. Joseph goes to Pilate and asks for the body of Jesus, but Pilate needs to be sure that Jesus is already dead. Some victims of crucifixion had been known to survive for days. He summons the centurion who crucified Jesus, who assures him that Jesus really is dead. So Pilate gives the body to Joseph.

Why is this important? Why has Mark chosen to include this detail about the certification of Jesus’ death? Because the entire truth of the resurrection rests upon it. There have always been those who, refusing to believe the clear evidence of the Gospel writers, have argued that Jesus only appeared to die on the cross but recovered in the tomb and walked out! And if Jesus did not die, the resurrection is a myth! There is no truth in the gospel that Christ died for our sins, that he was buried and that he rose again (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). The certainty of the resurrection rests securely on the certainty of his death.

And his burial is important too. This not only gives added confirmation to the fact that Jesus was truly dead, but it also helps us in our understanding of the significance of baptism. In Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 Paul teaches us that in baptism we are buried with Christ and raised with him to live a new life through our faith in the power of God. Of course, the word for baptise in Greek is baptizo which always means immerse, and all baptisms in the New Testament were by immersion. But how does this relate to Jesus’ burial? Let me put it like this:

When we first put our faith in Jesus we acknowledged that on the cross he died in our place, to take the punishment for our sins. In so doing we identified ourselves with his death. That’s why Paul could say in Galatians 2:20, I was crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. When you gave your life to Christ, you became a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). The old you died and a new you came alive. Baptism is a wonderful picture of that truth. Jesus died, was buried, and rose again. In baptism you act out your identification with him as you are buried in the water and come up out of it to live out the new life he has already given you. (See my book, You’d Better Believe It, for more on this).

But let’s look now at the man who buried the Lord Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea. Let’s read again verses 42-43.

And verses 46-47

46 So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. 47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.

First, please note the urgency of the situation. As I’m sure you know, the Jewish Sabbath lasted from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday. That’s why it was important for Jesus to be buried very soon after he died. Apart from the fact that it was against the Law for a dead body to remain exposed overnight, for the Jews all forms of work were prohibited on the Sabbath. So if Jesus’ followers didn’t bury him before sunset the Romans would have disposed of his body as they were not subject to the laws of the Sabbath. And, as verse 42 tells us, evening was already approaching when Joseph went to Pilate to ask for Jesus’ body.

Joseph was a well-respected member of the Sanhedrin, most of whom, as we know, were bitterly opposed to Jesus, but Joseph was an exception. When Mark says that he was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, he is implying that Joseph was a follower of Jesus, albeit until now, secretly. He had been present at Jesus’ trial before the high priest, but we’re told in Luke 23:51 that he had not consented to their decision and action.

Clearly Joseph had now decided to let his respect for Jesus be known publicly. What he was about to do could hardly be kept a secret. By coming in contact with a dead body he would make himself ritually unclean and would not be able to attend the synagogue the following day. His absence would be noticed. What’s more, it was a risky thing to show sympathy with anyone who had been crucified, especially on a charge of sedition. He was in danger not only of incurring the wrath of the Jewish authorities, but of the Romans too. No doubt that’s why

Mark says that Joseph went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus’ body.

Verse 46 tells us that, after Pilate had authorised Joseph to have the body

Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.

Matthew 27:60 explains that this tomb was one which Joseph had had carved for himself, and, to complete the picture, John 19:39 tells us that he was accompanied by Nicodemus, the member of the Sanhedrin who had come to Jesus by night in John 3. Perhaps he too had decided that it was high time to make his secret discipleship public. The message of Christ crucified demands a decision of us all. In the light of his death, are we prepared to stand up for him?

But Joseph and Nicodemus were not the only ones to play a significant part in the burial of Jesus. Verse 47 tells us that Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid. It’s time for us now to consider the important role of such women in the life of Jesus, and now at his death. We’ll start by going back to verses 40 and 41.

40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome. 41 In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there.

In many ways these verses should have been included at the end of our last talk, as they are part of the story of the crucifixion, but I have left them until now to link them with the references to these women a little later in the story. We have been told so much about Jesus’ male disciples that it’s easy to forget that he had female disciples too. Three women are named in these verses, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and Salome. But Mark tells us that many other women were also there watching the crucifixion from a distance. They had followed him since the early days of his ministry in Galilee and had cared for his needs. And, as we see in the last verse of the chapter and the first of the next, these devoted disciples were determined to care for his needs even after his death.

47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid. 15:1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body.

The three women named in these verses were among many who were not only devoted followers of Jesus, but who also supported Jesus and the apostles out of their own means. Luke 8:1-3 tells us that as Jesus travelled about proclaiming the good news of the kingdom…

…The Twelve were with him, 2 and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out 3 Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of Herod's household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.

These verses indicate the highly valued role of women among the early disciples, their devotion to Jesus often exceeding that of the men, as it does so often today. Apart from the apostle John, it was women, not men, who stood near the cross as Jesus was crucified (John 19:25-27), and, apart from secret disciples like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, it was women who participated in his burial and brought precious spices to anoint his body. And, as we see in the next chapter, it was to women that was given the first good news that Christ was risen. We’ll move into Chapter 16 next time for the final talk in our series, but let’s conclude today’s talk by considering the role of Mary Magdalene.

Perhaps the first thing to notice is that it is Mary Magdalene who is mentioned first each time these women are mentioned:

40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome.

47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.

15:1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body.

Secondly, Mary was the first person to witness the resurrection of Jesus:

15:9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.

Thirdly, she was the first person to proclaim the news that Jesus was risen:

15:10 She went and told those who had been with him.

The question naturally arises as to why Mary was so honoured. That verse in 1 Samuel 2:30 comes to mind – Those who honour me, I will honour. Mary had honoured the Lord by supporting him throughout his ministry, by remaining to the end at the scene of the crucifixion, by following Joseph to see where Jesus was buried, and by buying spices to anoint his body. She was clearly devoted to him. And that devotion sprang from what Jesus had done for her. He had driven seven demons out of her. Her deliverance led to a lifetime of devotion.

And isn’t that what motivates us? We love him because he first loved us. And if we honour him, the day will come when he will honour us.

View Details

Talk 46 Mark 15:16-39 The Crucifixion

Welcome to Talk 46 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Before we begin, I want to apologise to those of you who have been trying to visit my website. We’ve been facing some technical difficulties which have yet to be resolved and this has resulted in some delay in the production of these podcasts. However, as you must have discovered if you are now listening to this podcast, all my podcasts are accessible from the usual podcast providers. If in doubt, please google Great Bible Truths with Dr David Petts. But sincere apologies for any inconvenience you may have experienced so far. But now, for today’s talk.

Last time we considered Mark 15:1-15 where Jesus is tried before Pontius Pilate. We noted:

The continued determination of the Jewish leaders to have Jesus crucified
The total commitment of Jesus to the way of the cross
The complete moral failure of Pilate to do what was right.

And we saw that at the end of that passage Pilate has Jesus flogged and hands him over to be crucified. Today we pick up, the story in verses 16-20:

16 The soldiers led Jesus away into the palace (that is, the Praetorium) and called together the whole company of soldiers. 17 They put a purple robe on him, then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on him. 18 And they began to call out to him, "Hail, king of the Jews!" 19 Again and again they struck him on the head with a staff and spat on him. Falling on their knees, they paid homage to him. 20 And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him out to crucify him.

Jesus had said yes when Pilate asked him, Are you the king of the Jews? (v2). Of course, the soldiers would have thought that this was an absurd claim, and so they decided that, before they led him away to be crucified, they’d have some fun at his expense. So they put a purple robe on him. They put a crown of thorns on his head and called out, Hail, king of the Jews!" They fell on their knees and paid mock homage to him. Then, when their fun was over, they led him away to be crucified. But, as we shall see later, the soldiers weren’t the only ones to mock him. But first, verses 21-26:

21 A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross. 22 They brought Jesus to the place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull). 23 Then they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it. 24 And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get. 25 It was the third hour when they crucified him. 26 The written notice of the charge against him read: THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Simon, the man who was forced to carry Jesus’ cross, was from Cyrene in Libya, north Africa. It’s possible he had come on pilgrimage for the Passover festival and was staying in the countryside just outside Jerusalem.

It’s equally likely that, although he had originally come from Cyrene, he was now permanently living near Jerusalem, as Acts 6:9 seems to indicate that there was in Jerusalem a so-called Synagogue of Freedmen some of whom were men from Cyrene. The fact is, we simply do not know. Neither do we know who his sons, Alexander and Rufus were, although it’s possible that Rufus is referred to in Romans 16. The fact that Mark refers to them both by name does seem to suggest that they were known to the early Christian community for whom Mark was writing. We can’t help wondering whether they had become Christians as a result of their father’s unexpected encounter with Jesus.

What we do know is that Simon was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross. It was one of those occasions when something totally unexpected occurs in our lives. At first sight it might seem like sheer coincidence. He just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Or was it the right place at the right time? The Saviour of the world is on his way to be crucified. It’s the most important event in history. Is God in Heaven going to allow anything to happen by accident? Surely not. And if not, there was a divine purpose in Simon’s encounter with Jesus. He follows Jesus, carrying his cross all the way to Calvary. It’s hard to imagine that he did not remain to witness the events of the crucifixion and, having done so, to continue to follow him for the rest of his life. We’re reminded that we’re all called to take up our cross and follow Jesus.

But let’s pause for a moment and think about unexpected things that may happen in our lives or the lives of people we know who are not yet Christians. Of course, we all love to see miracles of healing that come unexpectedly and are positively life transforming. But what about events that seem negative, rather than positive, like being forced to carry someone else’s cross? Has it ever occurred to you that God might have a purpose in allowing these things to happen?

One Sunday morning in June 2016 I was preaching in Ireland on that passage in Matthew 8 where Jesus calms the storm. I remember saying that storms may arise in our lives, even during the coming week, but that Jesus would bring us safely through them. Little did I know that two days later my wife would suffer a massive stroke that was to leave her confined to a wheelchair for the next eight years.

And little did I know on 28th February this year that within less than 24 hours she would be in Heaven. Both were totally unexpected and life-changing events for both of us, but God brought us through, and Eileen has now safely arrived on the other side. Even when unexpected events seem totally negative, God can bring a positive outcome, even if we can’t see it at the time. And he can bring about unexpected events in the lives of those who don’t yet know him that will draw them to himself.

But back to our passage. They bring Jesus to the place of execution, and they offer him wine mixed with myrrh. This was an act of mercy to condemned criminals usually provided by the women of Jerusalem, but here passed on to Jesus by the soldiers. But Jesus does not accept it. He wants to remain in full possession of his faculties. No anaesthetic can ease the pain of the suffering he is about to endure. He is to bear the full agony of crucifixion, the full penalty for all our sins.

And so they crucify him. The Gospel writers spare us the physical details, perhaps because they were all too familiar to their readers, but also because Jesus’ suffering was far more than physical, and far more than the psychological torture he endured at the hands of those who humiliated him. His greatest agony was separation from his Father as the spotless Lamb of God bore the sins of the whole world. Most of the accusations brought against him were false, but he was finally condemned to death for telling the truth, for admitting who he really was, the Christ, the Son of God, the king of the Jews. But it mattered little to the Roman soldiers. They were too busy gambling for his clothes.

But now verses 27-32.

27 They crucified two robbers with him, one on his right and one on his left. 29 Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, "So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, 30 come down from the cross and save yourself!" 31 In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. "He saved others," they said, "but he can't save himself! 32 Let this Christ, this King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe." Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

Mark doesn’t say much about the two robbers crucified each side of Jesus. It’s Luke who tells us how one of them joined in with the mocking of the crowd and the soldiers, but is rebuked by the other one who says,

Don't you fear God, since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.

And then says,

Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.

This man could certainly not have understood the fully developed doctrine of salvation initiated by Jesus and later taught by the first apostles, but somehow he grasped enough to acknowledge that he was guilty, that he deserved his punishment, that Jesus was innocent and was indeed a king for whom death would not be the end but would lead to a kingdom in which somehow he, a robber, hoped to be remembered. He could hardly ask for more, but Jesus grants him far more than he asks for:

I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise (Luke 23:43).

That was what Jesus was dying for – the salvation of sinners, sinners like this robber, even sinners like Barabbas whose place on that cross Jesus had taken, and sinners like you and me.

But back to our passage in Mark. We saw in verses 16-20 how the soldiers humiliated, mocked and abused Jesus. Now in verses 29-32 we see the mockery continuing, this time not just by those who passed by but by the chief priests and teachers of the law as well. Looking at the passage as a whole, we see that Jesus was mocked by the soldiers who crucified him, the unrepentant thief on the cross beside him, those who were passing by without even stopping to think, the chief priests and teachers of the law, and, as we see in the next section, the man who offered Jesus wine vinegar to drink.

Verses 33-34.

33 At the sixth hour darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour.

This darkness lasted from 12 noon until 3 o’clock in the afternoon. It can’t have been a normal eclipse of the sun, as Passover was celebrated at the time of the full moon when the moon would have been in the wrong part of the sky. This darkness was a supernatural event initiated by God himself. All attempts at astronomical explanation of such events, including incidentally the star followed by the Magi in Matthew 2, are totally futile. When God works a miracle there is no natural explanation. If there were, it would not be a miracle!

But what was the purpose of this darkness? It’s mentioned in Matthew and Luke as well as Mark, but none of them tell us its purpose, so we need to tread carefully here. We’re on holy ground. But perhaps we can find an answer in the events that are closely connected with it in the Gospel records – Jesus’ cry, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?, the tearing of the temple curtain from the top to the bottom, the earthquake that accompanied it, the constant demands of the Jews for a sign from Heaven, the final cry of Jesus, It is finished, and the cry of the centurion, Surely this man was the Son of God.

Combined with these events we can surely interpret the darkness as a sign of God’s anger at human sin, and at the rejection of his Son by the Jewish leaders. It was a sign that this crucifixion was no ordinary crucifixion. It was a sign that temple worship was now terminated. It was the sign that the Jewish leaders had constantly demanded but still would not accept. It was a sign of God’s vindication of all that Jesus had claimed to be. It was a sign, for all who, like the centurion, would receive it, that Jesus was indeed the Son of God.

34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" – which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

From before time began, back in eternity, Jesus, the Son of God, had enjoyed intimate fellowship with his Father. But now, as Jesus carries our sin, God who is holy and cannot look on sin (Habakkuk 1:13), turns his face away. This for Jesus was the greatest agony of the cross. But his cry must not be seen as a cry of despair. Jesus was well aware that he was quoting Psalm 22 which in so many ways was prophetic of the crucifixion, but which concludes in glorious triumph, for all the ends of the earth will turn to the Lord and all the families of the nations will bow down before him. It was for the joy that was set before him that he endured the cross (Hebrews 12:2).

Verses 35-39 complete the story.

35 When some of those standing near heard this, they said, "Listen, he's calling Elijah." 36 One man ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. "Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to take him down," he said. 37 With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last. 38 The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39 And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and saw how he died, he said, "Surely this man was the Son of God!"

Jesus’ cry had been in Aramaic, but some mistakenly thought he was calling for Elijah. The mocking continues right to the end - Let's see if Elijah comes to take him down.

John 19:28-30 supplies some information not given in the Synoptic Gospels. Jesus says, I am thirsty and in response he is offered wine vinegar to drink, which he accepts and then cries, It is finished. This is undoubtedly the loud cry referred to in Mark 15:37. Jesus had refused the wine offered to him earlier, but now the work of atonement was complete. He accepts the drink to clear his voice for one last final cry. It is finished.

There was so much that was finished at that moment, not just his earthly life and suffering, but the reason for that suffering was now accomplished, the work of atonement, the bearing of our sin, the means of entry into the presence of a holy God as the veil of the temple is split in two from the top to the bottom. No longer the need for the animal sacrifices demanded by the Law, no longer a temple made with human hands… Jesus has done it all – and he did it for me!

The Roman centurion could not possibly have understood all that, but he understood enough to know that Jesus really was the Son of God. Perhaps he came to understand later, not only that Jesus was the Soon of God, but that he was, in the words of Paul, The Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me. Charles Wesley certainly understood it when he wrote:

It's finished, the Messiah dies, cut off for sins, but not his own.

Accomplished is the sacrifice, the great redeeming work is done.

It’s finished, all the debt is paid, justice divine is satisfied,

The grand and full atonement made; God for guilty world has died.

The veil is rent in Christ alone, the living way to heaven is seen,

The middle wall is broken down and all mankind my enter in.

The types and figures are fulfilled; exacted is the legal pain.

The precious promises are sealed, the spotless Lamb of God is slain.

The reign of sin and death is o’er, and all may live from since set free.

Satan has lost his mortal power. It’s swallowed up in victory!

Saved from the legal curse I am. My saviour hangs on yonder tree.

See there the meek expiring Lamb. It’s finished, he expires for me.

Accepted in the well beloved and clothed in righteousness divine

I see the bar to heaven removed, and all thy merits, Lord, are mine.

Death, hell, and sin are now subdued. All grace is now to sinners given.

And lo, I plead the atoning blood, and in thy right I claim thy heaven.

God bless you.

View Details

Talk 45 Mark 15:1-15 The Trial before Pilate

Welcome to Talk 45 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 15:1-15 where Jesus is on trial before Pilate. We’ll begin by reading the whole passage.

1 Very early in the morning, the chief priests, with the elders, the teachers of the law and the whole Sanhedrin, reached a decision. They bound Jesus, led him away and handed him over to Pilate.

2 "Are you the king of the Jews?" asked Pilate. "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied.

3 The chief priests accused him of many things. 4 So again Pilate asked him, "Aren't you going to answer? See how many things they are accusing you of." 5 But Jesus still made no reply, and Pilate was amazed.

6 Now it was the custom at the Feast to release a prisoner whom the people requested. 7 A man called Barabbas was in prison with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the uprising. 8 The crowd came up and asked Pilate to do for them what he usually did. 9 "Do you want me to release to you the king of the Jews?" asked Pilate, 10 knowing it was out of envy that the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him.

11 But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have Pilate release Barabbas instead.

12 "What shall I do, then, with the one you call the king of the Jews?" Pilate asked them.

13 "Crucify him!" they shouted.

14 "Why? What crime has he committed?" asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, "Crucify him!"

15 Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

Mark’s account of this trial is much shorter than the accounts in the other Gospels, but this passage reveals very clearly three things:

The continued determination of the Jewish leaders to have Jesus crucified
The total commitment of Jesus to the way of the cross
The complete moral failure of Pilate to do what was right.

The continued determination of the Jewish leaders to have Jesus crucified

This goes back as far as Mark 3:6 where they began to plot how they might kill Jesus for healing on the Sabbath day. Eventually, as we saw last time, after a mock trial before Caiaphas, they condemned him as worthy of death (14:64). So now they reach a decision. They have no power themselves to put him to death. So they hand him over to Pilate the Roman governor.

They demand that Jesus be crucified. But why crucifixion? The usual method of execution among the Jews was stoning (e.g. Achan in Joshua 7:25 and Stephen in Acts 7:58). Crucifixion was the Roman death penalty for rebellion. It was reserved for foreigners and slaves. Roman citizens were executed by the more merciful means of decapitation. So why did the Jews ask for Jesus to be crucified?

Probably because, although crucifixion was not a Jewish practice, the bodies of those who were stoned to death were sometimes hung on a tree until the evening as a public sign that they were under God’s curse (Deuteronomy 21:23). Paul refers to this in Galatians 3:13 when he says that Jesus was made a curse for us when he died on the cross.

It seems likely, then, that the Jewish leaders wanted the people to believe that Jesus was not the Messiah some of them thought he was, but that he was really under God’s curse. Another possibility, of course, is that they did it out of sheer spite because they envied him (v10) and hated him so much.

But, whatever their motivation, to achieve their end Mark simply tells us that they accused him of many things (v3). Luke 23, however, gives us a bit more detail:

…they began to accuse him, saying, "We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king." 3 So Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. 4 Then Pilate announced to the chief priests and the crowd, "I find no basis for a charge against this man." 5 But they insisted, "He stirs up the people all over Judea by his teaching. He started in Galilee and has come all the way here."

So the charges were:

· Opposing payment of taxes to Caesar

· Claiming to be Christ, a king

· Stirring up the people or inciting people to rebellion – v14.

Only one of these accusations had any basis in fact. Jesus did claim to be – indeed he was – the Christ, the Messiah, and he certainly was a king. But, as he told Pilate in John 18:36 his kingdom was not of this world… my kingdom is from another place. Jesus had never incited people to rebellion, quite the opposite. And he had never opposed payment of taxes to Caesar. In fact, he had encouraged it.

And the only way he had stirred up the people was to love their enemies. And far from inciting people to rebellion, he taught them to do good to those who persecuted them. In fact, if anyone was guilty of stirring up the people, it was the chief priests. When Pilate wanted to release Jesus, they stirred up the crowd (v11) to demand that Jesus be crucified, and Pilate, fearing a riot, hands Jesus over to be crucified.

The total commitment of Jesus to the way of the cross

We saw last time when we considered Jesus’ trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin that Jesus didn’t defend himself, that he refused to answer the charges brought against him, and that only when put under oath did he confess the truth as to who he really was. He knew it would lead to his death, even death on a cross, but he knew that the shedding of his blood was the only way to atone for our sins.

And that, of course, was his motivation when he conducted himself in much the same way when on trial before Pilate. There’s a distinct feeling of déjà vu here. Once again Jesus refuses to answer the accusations the Jews are bringing against him and Pilate asks him:

Aren't you going to answer? See how many things they are accusing you of (v4).

But Jesus still makes no reply (v5). Again, he refuses to respond to their false accusations, but he will speak about who he is. When Pilate asks, Are you the king of the Jews? Jesus answers, Yes, it is as you say (v2). But John gives us a fuller picture. When Pilate asks the same question (18:34), Jesus replies:

36 My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.

37… You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.

To which Pilate replies, What is truth? but doesn’t wait for an answer. Little did he know that the personification of truth was standing right in front of him!

And in John 19:9, when Pilate asks Jesus, Where do you come from?, Jesus remains silent, so Pilate retorts:

Do you refuse to speak to me? Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you? (v10),

to which Jesus replies:

You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above... (v11).

No human authority could destroy the Prince of Life. They were able to crucify him only because God himself allowed them to. And knowing that this was his Father’s will, and the only means of our salvation, Jesus deliberately invites the death sentence by refusing to defend himself and by acknowledging who he is – the king, who had come into the world to bear witness to the truth, to whom everyone who is on the side of truth will listen. But, sadly, that was not something that Pilate was willing to do.

The complete moral failure of Pilate to do what was right

Mark’s account is, as usual, briefer than those in the other Gospels. Mark’s summary of Pilate’s failure is twofold:

he knows that the chief priests have handed Jesus over to him out of envy (v10)
it’s because he wants to satisfy the crowd that he has Jesus flogged and hands him over to be crucified (v15).

In other words, he knows that the accusations brought against Jesus are wrongly motivated, and, despite that, because he himself is wrongly motivated, he condemns Jesus to death. But in Luke and John, Pilate’s guilt is compounded by the fact that Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent. In both these Gospels Pilate proclaims Jesus’ innocence three times.

Look at Luke 23. In verse 4 we read:

Then Pilate announced to the chief priests and the crowd, "I find no basis for a charge against this man."

In verse 15 we read:

he has done nothing to deserve death.

And in verse 22:

For the third time he spoke to them: "Why? What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty.

Now look at John 18 and 19

In 18:38

I find no basis for a charge against him.

In 19:4 he says again:

I find no basis for a charge against him.

And in 19:6 he says it again:

As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.

So there can be no doubt about it. Pilate knew that Jesus was innocent. His wife had even sent him a message:

Don't have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him (Matthew 27:19).

And yet, despite the fact that he knows Jesus is innocent, he has him flogged and hands him over to be crucified.

But that is not all. Another aspect of Pilate’s failure is his refusal to accept responsibility. As the Roman governor he enjoyed a privileged position. But privilege carries with it responsibility. It was Pilate’s responsibility to judge fairly in these matters, but throughout the whole story we see him trying to pass the buck.

First, we see him trying to pass the matter back to Sanhedrin. In John 18:31 he says:

Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.

But they object saying:

But we have no right to execute anyone.

Next, he attempts to get King Herod, who was in Jerusalem at the time, to deal with the case (Luke 18:6-12). Herod agrees that Jesus has done nothing to deserve death, but the Jews are insistent that Jesus be crucified.

Then Pilate tries to pass the responsibility over to the crowd, by offering according to the custom at the Passover to release to them a prisoner of their choosing, but they choose Barabbas rather than Jesus – as might have been obvious to Pilate bearing in mind the hostility of the crowd to Jesus (Matthew 27:15-21).

And finally, having exhausted all options, he takes water and washes his hands in front of the crowd, saying, I am innocent of this man’s blood. It is your responsibility (Matthew 27:24).

So who was responsible for the death of Jesus? Was it Judas who betrayed him, or Peter who denied him, or all the disciples who deserted him, or Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, or Herod or Pilate, or the Roman soldiers who crucified him? Surely the answer is ALL OF THE ABOVE. They must all bear some measure of guilt. But ultimately the judgment lies with God alone.

But are they the only guilty ones? Or are we ourselves also to blame? Jesus’ death was necessary to atone for our sins as well as theirs. Let’s not, like Pilate, refuse to take responsibility for our actions. Let’s not pretend we are innocent, when we know we are not. Let us rather acknowledge our weaknesses, our failings, our faithlessness, our shortcomings, our sin. Forgiveness was available to all those responsible for the death of Jesus if only they would admit their guilt and believe in him. Some, like Peter and the disciples who forsook Jesus, did just that. The others, as far as we know, did not. Let’s not make the same mistake. God’s promise in 1 John 1:9 still holds good:

If we confess our sin, he is faithful and just, and will forgive us our sin and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Prayer.

View Details

Talk 44 Mark 14:53-72 Jesus’ trial and Peter’s denial

Welcome to Talk 44 in our series of Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at chapter 14, verses 53-72. This passage recounts the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin and Peter’s denial of Jesus in the courtyard of the high priest’s house where the trial was taking place. The key figures in the passage are:

· The members of the Sanhedrin who wanted Jesus dead

· Jesus himself who knew that his death was necessary for our salvation

· Peter who denied Jesus even though he had protested that he would never do so.

We’ll begin by reading verses 53-65 where we see the outrageous injustice of the trial and Jesus’ refusal to defend himself.

53 They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, elders and teachers of the law came together. 54 Peter followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire. 55 The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death, but they did not find any. 56 Many testified falsely against him, but their statements did not agree. 57 Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: 58 "We heard him say, 'I will destroy this man-made temple and in three days will build another, not made by man.'" 59 Yet even then their testimony did not agree. 60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, "Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?" 61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" 62 "I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." 63 The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked. 64 "You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?" They all condemned him as worthy of death. 65 Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, "Prophesy!" And the guards took him and beat him.

53 They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, elders and teachers of the law came together.

The word for high priest in Greek is archiereus. It’s unclear why NIV sometimes translates this as chief priest. Perhaps it’s because, although Caiaphas was the high priest, Annas his father-in-law, who had been high priest until he was deposed by the Romans, was also present. So by all the chief priests Mark means all two of them!

54 Peter followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire.

We’ll deal with this verse when we come to Peter’s denial at the end of the chapter.

55 The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death, but they did not find any.

The Sanhedrin was a council comprised of 71 men, including both Pharisees and Sadducees, who were supposed to be the spiritual leaders of the nation. The vast majority of them had opposed Jesus throughout his ministry because of:

his forthright condemnation of their hypocrisy

his interpretation of the Old Testament which was radically different from theirs

his recent actions in ‘cleansing’ the temple – see Talk 34

his claims to be the Messiah.

If Jesus proved to be the kind of Messiah the people were expecting, they feared that this could lead to a revolt against Roman authority. This seems to have been the justification they were looking for in seeking to kill Jesus. In John 11:50 Caiaphas had stated that it was better for one man to die than that the whole nation perish. It’s more likely, however, that their true motivation was the fear of losing their privileged position in society.

56 Many testified falsely against him, but their statements did not agree. 57 Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: 58 "We heard him say, 'I will destroy this man-made temple and in three days will build another, not made by man.'" 59 Yet even then their testimony did not agree.

These verses underline the total injustice of the whole trial. Mark emphasises that their testimony was false. This is emphasised by the fact that even then their testimony did not agree. Part of the role of the Sanhedrin was to uphold the Law of Moses. As we’ve seen in previous talks, they were insistent on obedience to petty regulations but ignored the more important matters of the Law – justice, mercy and faithfulness. Jesus had accused them of straining out gnats but swallowing camels (Matthew 23:23-24)! Now these religious leaders reveal the full extent of their hypocrisy. To achieve their ends, they wilfully ignore justice and break God’s clear commandment, You shall not give false testimony against your neighbour (Exodus 20:16).

Of course there was an element of truth in the testimony of those who reported what Jesus had said about destroying the temple. Who will believe what a liar says if all that he says in untrue? A successful liar is one who includes in his testimony things which are true, but nevertheless distorts the truth in some way. No doubt that’s why in our lawcourts today a witness must promise to say the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Notice the difference between what Jesus actually said in John 2:19 and what these false witnesses reported him as saying:

· Jesus had not said I will destroy… He said Destroy…

· He had had not said I will destroy this man-made temple. He said Destroy this temple.

· He had not said I will build another, not made by man. He said I will raise it again.

John goes on to explain that Jesus was talking about the temple of his body. To say the least, the accusation levelled against Jesus was inaccurate, whether deliberately so or not. The witnesses against him were unreliable, their testimony a distortion of what he actually said.

60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, "Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?" 61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?"

At first Jesus will not dignify their false accusations and questions with an answer. He did the same when later interrogated by Pilate (John19:8-11). Perhaps he had in mind the prophecy of Isaiah:

He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; He was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth (Isaiah 53:7).

But perhaps he remained silent because he knew that there was no point in defending himself. He had already committed himself to the way of the cross and his death was now inevitable. He replies only when charged under oath in the name of the living God to reveal his identity (Matthew 26:63). And his reply is just what the high priest is hoping for.

62 "I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

In the Greek text, the words for I am are ego eimi. In John’s Gospel Jesus’ frequent use of these two words are undoubtedly a declaration of his deity. See, for example, John 8:58 where Jesus declares, I tell you the truth… before Abraham was, I AM. It’s possibly Mark’s intention in including it here, but if not, what Jesus says next is enough to incur the charge of blasphemy. Jesus came to bear witness to the truth, and that included the truth about himself. He was none other than the great I AM. And that truth would ultimately be vindicated. Those who accused him of blasphemy now would one day see him seated at God’s right hand.

63 The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked. 64 "You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?" They all condemned him as worthy of death.

Caiaphas is delighted. He now has all the proof he needs. Jesus has condemned himself out of his own mouth. There’s no more need for witnesses. Jesus deserves to die. But under the Roman occupation, the Jews couldn’t put anyone to death. For that they would need Pilate’s authority. But not before they have taken the opportunity to ridicule and mistreat the prisoner.

65 Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, "Prophesy!" And the guards took him and beat him.

Matthew 26:68 gives us a slightly fuller version of this – Prophesy, Christ, who hit you. In other words, Surely if you are the Christ, the Messiah, you can tell us by prophetic revelation who hit you. But Jesus remains silent. The spitting, the punching and the beating are only the beginning of the unjust treatment that Jesus is to receive over the next 24 hours.

From what we have seen so far, it’s clear that the whole trial was rigged from the start. Jesus’ accusers were not interested in finding out the truth. They were looking for an excuse to get rid of him. They couldn’t find any real evidence that would condemn him, so they invented it! The witnesses were all biased. They were clearly prepared to say anything they thought would achieve their purpose. They distorted what Jesus had said and made it mean something quite different. Finally, they mistreated Jesus before taking him to Pilate to demand the death sentence.

And we need to remember that Jesus warned his disciples that they would be treated unfairly too. There’s plenty of evidence of this in the Book of Acts. An example that comes to mind is Stephen, the first Christian to die for his faith. When his hearers couldn’t stand up against his wisdom and the Spirit by whom he spoke… they secretly persuaded some men to say that they had heard him speak words of blasphemy (Acts 6:10-11). And most of the early disciples were martyred for their faith.

And, as I’m sure most of my listeners will know, there are many parts of the world where even today Christians are being unjustly treated, persecuted, and tortured for their faith. But even in countries where this is not happening, many of the opponents of Christianity are guilty of the same hypocrisy as Jesus’ accusers were at his trial. They’re not really interested in finding out the truth. They’re looking for excuses to disbelieve his message because they are not prepared to accept its implication for their lifestyle. If they really wanted to know the truth, they would find it.

But, of course, we Christians are not always innocent when it comes to hypocrisy. Fear of the opposition can cause us to deny what we truly believe, as we see as we now read the rest of today’s passage:

54 Peter followed Jesus at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire.

66 While Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came by. 67 When she saw Peter warming himself, she looked closely at him. "You also were with that Nazarene, Jesus," she said. 68 But he denied it. "I don't know or understand what you're talking about," he said, and went out into the entrance, and the cock crowed. 69 When the servant girl saw him there, she said again to those standing around, "This fellow is one of them." 70 Again he denied it. After a little while, those standing near said to Peter, "Surely you are one of them, for you are a Galilean." 71 He began to call down curses on himself, and he swore to them, "I don't know this man you're talking about." 72 Immediately the cock crowed the second time. Then Peter remembered the word Jesus had spoken to him: "Before the cock crows twice you will disown me three times." And he broke down and wept.

This passage speaks for itself. But let’s just remind ourselves of what happened earlier in the chapter. In verse 27 Jesus had told his disciples, You will all fall away. But in verse 29 Peter declared. Even if all fall away, I will not.

But Jesus answered, I tell you the truth… Today – yes, tonight – before the cock crows twice you yourself will disown me three times. But Peter insisted emphatically, Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you.

He declared his loyalty. He insisted on it emphatically. But now, in the courtyard of the high priest, he declares his disloyalty to Jesus even more emphatically. He calls down curses on himself and swears, I don't know this man you're talking about. And in doing so he fulfils the prophecy of Jesus and disowns him three times. The cock crows, and Peter remembers and breaks down in tears.

But, of course, we know that that’s not the end of the story. At the very end of John’s Gospel, we read how, after his death and resurrection, Jesus gives Peter the chance three times to reaffirm his love and loyalty and reassures him that he will yet have the opportunity to lay down his life for him.

And that turns our attention away from Peter and onto Jesus himself, for in Peter’s disloyal actions we see the reason for Jesus’ actions during the trial. It was for Peter, and for people like him, for you and for me, that Jesus doesn’t defend himself, that he refuses to answer the charges brought against him, that when put under oath he confesses the truth as to who he really is.

He knows it will lead to his death, but he knows that the shedding of his blood is the only way to atone for all the sins, all the failings, all the disloyalty of all the ‘Peters’, throughout all the world, for all time. So he remains loyal to his Father’s will, and his loyalty unto death atones for our disloyalty. His obedience atones for our disobedience.

And that’s why, in Peter’s own words, even though we have not seen him, we love him (1 Peter 1:8). It’s because he suffered for us that we are willing to follow in his steps (1 Peter 2:21), remembering that, after we have suffered a little while, God has called us to his eternal glory in Christ (1 Peter 5:10).

Lord Jesus, we do love you, even though we haven’t seen you.

Because you suffered for us, we are willing to follow in your steps and, if need be, to suffer for you.

And we thank you that you have called us to your eternal glory. Amen.

View Details

Talk 43 Mark 14:27-52 The Garden of Gethsemane

Welcome to Talk 43 in our series on Mark's gospel. Today we're looking at Mark 14:27-52. This is a long passage and so to save time we will not read through it in advance. In verses 27-31 Jesus predicts that Peter will deny him. In verses 32-42 we read of Jesus’ agonised prayers in the Garden of Gethsemane and of his disciples’ failure to support him in his time of need. And in verses 43-52 we read how Judas betrays him and how Jesus is arrested. The overall theme of the passage is the contrast between the commitment of Jesus to do his Father's will whatever the consequences and his disciples’ weakness and failures.

Jesus predicts Peter’s denial 27-31

"You will all fall away," Jesus told them, "for it is written: "'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.' 28 But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee." 29 Peter declared, "Even if all fall away, I will not." 30 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "today – yes, tonight – before the cock crows twice you yourself will disown me three times." 31 But Peter insisted emphatically, "Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you." And all the others said the same.

Jesus has just eaten the Passover meal with his disciples, at the end of which verse 26 tells us that, When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. On their way there, Jesus predicts, not only that Peter will deny him, but that all his disciples will fall away. How does Jesus know this? We saw last time that Jesus knew in advance much of what was about to happen. And this knowledge sprang from his intimate communion with his heavenly Father.

Much of that knowledge came from the understanding that certain verses of the Old Testament applied to him directly. God often speaks to us through scripture, but sometimes he speaks directly to us without reference to scripture. Perhaps, as Jesus studied the Old Testament, God quickened certain scriptures to him and Jesus knew that those words applied to him.

The quote in verse 27 is from Zechariah 13:7. Jesus saw his disciples as a little flock of which he was the shepherd. He knows that his arrest and imminent crucifixion would shake their faith, and so he warns them in advance, but offers them hope by reminding them that he will rise from the dead and will see them again in Galilee. But Peter, always the one to speak up too hastily, protests:

Even if all fall away, I will not.

No doubt his protest was sincere, but it was seriously mistaken. Firstly, it was a contradiction in terms. The word all implies there are no exceptions. If all will fall away, then Peter will fall away. But more seriously, it was a contradiction of the prophetic scripture and a contradiction of the Lord Jesus himself. But, as we have seen on other occasions, Peter was not afraid to contradict Jesus, if he didn’t like what Jesus was saying.

We need to beware of not taking seriously what God has said to us and of making rash promises to God. Our commitment to him should be thought through and weighed carefully. Jesus’ reply is not based on a word of scripture, but on direct revelation from God himself. It’s a very specific prophecy which is fulfilled to the letter later in the chapter, even though at this stage Peter refuses to believe it.

But before we criticise Peter too severely, we need to remember that all the others said the same (v31). They may not have denied Jesus as Peter did, but they all failed to support Jesus in the hour of his greatest need, falling asleep instead of praying as Jesus had asked them to (vv.37, 44; Luke 22:46).

The Garden of Gethsemane 32-42

32. They went to a place called Gethsemane, and Jesus said to his disciples, "Sit here while I pray." 33 He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled. 34 "My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death," he said to them. "Stay here and keep watch."

35 Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. 36 "Abba, Father," he said, "everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will." 37 Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Simon," he said to Peter, "are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? 38 Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."

39 Once more he went away and prayed the same thing. 40 When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They did not know what to say to him. 41 Returning the third time, he said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting? Enough! The hour has come. Look, the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 42 Rise! Let us go! Here comes my betrayer!"

In this passage we see a contrast between the failure of all the disciples and the commitment of Jesus to do his Father’s will whatever the cost.

The failure of all the disciples

If we compare it with the parallel passages in Matthew 26 and Luke 22, the sequence of events seems to have been as follows:

Jesus leads his disciples to the Garden of Gethsemane on the slopes of the Mount of Olives. He tells them all that he is going to spend some time in prayer and that they must pray that they will not fall into temptation. He then takes Peter, James and John with him and, becoming deeply distressed and troubled, he shares his grief with them, saying, My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death and tells them to pray and keep watch, but they all completely fail to do so. Jesus returns to them no less than three times, and on each occasion finds them all sleeping. They have failed to give him support in his most urgent time of need.

And it’s going to get worse before it gets better! Judas is coming to betray him. And Jesus’ prophecy that they will all fall away (v27) is about to be fulfilled. They will all desert him and flee (v50). But before we attempt to account for such a failure, and then finish by considering Jesus’ commitment to his Father’s will, let’s just read the rest of today’s passage to remind ourselves of what happens when Jesus is arrested.

43 Just as he was speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve appeared. With him was a crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests, the teachers of the law, and the elders. 44 Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I kiss is the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard." 45 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Rabbi!" and kissed him. 46 The men seized Jesus and arrested him. 47 Then one of those standing near drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. 48 "Am I leading a rebellion," said Jesus, "that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? 49 Every day I was with you, teaching in the temple courts, and you did not arrest me. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled." 50 Then everyone deserted him and fled. 51 A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, 52 he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.

I think this passage pretty much speaks for itself, but let’s just add in a few extra details that we find in the other Gospels. John 18:10 tells us that it was Peter who cut off the servant’s ear, and Luke 22:57 tells how Jesus healed it. And Matthew 52-54 records that Jesus said:

Put your sword back in its place, …for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?"

In fairness to Peter, perhaps he was trying to make up for his failure to stay awake and keep watch. Or was he acting out of fear? We’re not told, but at all events it was a foolish thing to do in the light of the fact that Judas was accompanied by a whole crowd of people armed with swords and clubs. Jesus responds to Peter’s aggressive action by replacing the man’s ear, thus reminding Peter both of his supernatural power and of the heart of his message – Jesus had not come to destroy life, but to save it. He points out to Peter three things:

The danger of relying on human resources
The power and resources of God at Jesus’ disposal
The fact that the Scriptures must be fulfilled.

Jesus’ words and actions were determined by his knowledge of God’s redemptive plan for the salvation of mankind. He had pleaded with God that, if it were possible, he might be released from the way of the cross. But he knew that the Scriptures must be fulfilled. His kingdom was not to be achieved by military violence and force, but by love and sacrifice and suffering. He was not leading a rebellion (v48). He had come to save – even those who had come to arrest him.

So the disciples, exemplified by Peter, got it wrong again and again. But how do we account for their failure? Jesus gives us the answer in verse 38 – the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. The Greek word for flesh here is sarx. This is sometimes used in the New Testament simply to refer to our body, but it can also refer to our fallen nature and moral weakness. In Galatians 5, for example, the deeds of the flesh are contrasted with the fruit of the Spirit. Here, in Mark 14, it probably refers to both. The disciples’ sleepiness was due to the weakness of their bodies, but there is also an indication of a failure in character. There is a gentle reproach in verse 37 when Jesus says, Simon, are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour?

Of course, we’ve all been there! Despite our best intentions we have failed to do what we know we ought to do. Paul deals with this at the end of Romans 7 and concludes that the key to victory is through Jesus Christ our Lord (v25). In our own strength we will fail, but through Christ, the Holy Spirit has set us free from the tendency to sin (Romans 8:2). If we walk in the Spirit we will not fulfil the desires of the flesh (Galatians 5:16).

But the disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane had not yet received the Holy Spirit. That was to happen after Jesus had died, risen again, and sent the Spirit. After they had experienced the resurrection and been filled with the Spirit at Pentecost, they were changed men. They were not perfect, but they had received a power by which they could live in victory as long as they followed the leading of the Spirit. And rather than deserting Jesus, they now counted suffering for the sake of Jesus a privilege and rejoiced that they had been allowed to do so (Acts 5:41). And all this became possible for them, and also for us, because of Jesus’ commitment to do his Father’s will in the Garden of Gethsemane.

The commitment of Jesus to do his Father’s will

Mark tells us that Jesus was deeply distressed and troubled. He was overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. And so he asks his disciples to pray and then moves away from them to be in solitude with God. He prays that, if it’s possible, the hour might pass from him. Of course he doesn’t want to die. No one would choose to be crucified. He knew that, if he asked him to, God would give him more than twelve legions of angels to deliver him (Matthew 26:53).

Make no mistake about it. Jesus had a choice. He did not have to drink the cup of God’s wrath. Even at that late hour, everything was possible with God. There was a way to escape the cross. But at what cost? The salvation of his disciples was in his hands. Your salvation and mine. Jesus sees in the weakness and failings of his own disciples my weakness and failings too. He finds them sleeping instead of praying. He knows that Peter will deny him. He knows that they will all desert him. And he knows that his destiny is to be the Lamb that must be sacrificed to atone for the sins of the whole world. This he had agreed with his Father from before time began.

And so, out of commitment to his Father’s will, out of commitment to God’s fore-ordained plan, and out of commitment to his disciples, he prays, Nevertheless, Father, your will be done. Thank God that he did!

View Details

Talk 42 Mark 14:12-26 The Last Supper

Welcome to Talk 42 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we're looking at Mark 14:12-26. The subject is the Last Supper. It was to be the last meal that Jesus ate with his disciples before he was crucified. It was the feast of the Passover when the Jews annually remembered the way in which God had led their ancestors out of Egypt.

You will of course remember that the Israelites had been in captivity in Egypt and how Moses had constantly demanded of Pharaoh to let God's people go. In the end, God said that he would smite all the firstborn of Egypt because of Pharaoh’s constant refusal to do as he demanded. The Israelites were told to daub the blood of a lamb on the doorposts and lintels of their houses so that the angel of death would pass over them and their firstborn would not die.

Now Jesus, the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world by the shedding of his blood on the cross, gives the Passover meal a whole new meaning. In fact, his followers who are to become the new Israel, will have a far greater deliverance to celebrate, their deliverance from the bondage of sin, and will regularly share bread and wine together to remind themselves of all that Jesus has done for them. The Christian communion service replaces for us the Passover meal.

The Gospel accounts vary a little in places, but we’ll concentrate on Mark while noting a few extra details that we find in Matthew and Luke. As we now read through the passage, I’d like you to notice the many things that Jesus already knew about all that was going to happen.

12 On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb, Jesus' disciples asked him, "Where do you want us to go and make preparations for you to eat the Passover?" 13 So he sent two of his disciples, telling them, "Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him. 14 Say to the owner of the house he enters, 'The Teacher asks: Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?' 15 He will show you a large upper room, furnished and ready. Make preparations for us there." 16 The disciples left, went into the city and found things just as Jesus had told them. So they prepared the Passover.

17 When evening came, Jesus arrived with the Twelve. 18 While they were reclining at the table eating, he said, "I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me – one who is eating with me." 19 They were saddened, and one by one they said to him, "Surely not I?" 20 "It is one of the Twelve," he replied, "one who dips bread into the bowl with me. 21 The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

22 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take it; this is my body." 23 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. 24 "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them. 25 "I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God." 26 When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

In this passage I see five things that Jesus clearly knew:

· He knew the details of where they would eat the Passover

· He knew what Judas would do and what would happen to him

· He knew that scripture must be fulfilled

· He knew that he was going to die and why it was necessary

· He knew that God would vindicate him.

So now let’s look at the passage in a little more detail and see what we can learn from each of these aspects of Jesus’ knowledge.

He knew the details of where they would eat the Passover

The disciples ask Jesus where he wants them to make the preparations for the Passover meal. So Jesus sends two of his disciples (who, incidentally, we know from Luke 22:8, were Peter and John), and tells them to go into Jerusalem where they will meet a man carrying a jar of water. They are to follow him and go into the house he enters.

They are to say to the owner of the house, The Teacher asks: Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples? He will show them a large upper room, furnished and ready. It’s there they are to make the final preparations for the meal. And Mark tells us that the disciples found things just as Jesus had told them.

Of course, some of these things Jesus could have known at a natural level. He could have made previous arrangements with the owner of the house, and he could have known that the owner had a man servant who sometimes carried water for him – something unusual in those days as normally it was the women who carried water. But it seems far less likely that Jesus, without supernatural knowledge imparted by the Holy Spirit, would have known that the man would be carrying water at exactly the time the disciples went into the city or even that the disciples would have crossed paths with him. But the disciples found everything just as Jesus had told them, just as they had when he had sent them to find the donkey on which he was to ride into Jerusalem in Mark 11.

Jesus was a man, and as man there were things he knew in the same way that all human beings know them. But he was a man who lived in close fellowship with his Father, God – indeed, he was God – and there were things he knew by divine revelation. And such revelation is available to us too, as we are filled with the Spirit and in live in close relationship with our heavenly Father. And when we receive such supernatural revelation, it’s possible to know that we know, just as certainly as we know that we know some things at a natural level.

He knew what Judas would do and what would happen to him

Verses 10 and 11 tell us that Judas had already gone to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them and that they were delighted to hear this and promised to give him money. So Judas was looking for an opportunity to hand Jesus over to them. There are many theories as to why Judas did this, but in my view it’s pointless to speculate. But two things are clear. First, whatever his motivations, Judas was responsible and accountable for his own actions. In verse 21 Jesus says:

…woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.

But secondly, it’s clear that Judas’ betrayal of Jesus was already predicted in Scripture. Jesus says:

The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man!...

And in Acts 1:16, no doubt remembering what Jesus had said, Peter says:

Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as a guide for those who arrested Jesus…

But, people ask, was this fair? How could God hold Judas responsible for his actions if, long before he was born, the Scripture predicted that he would do so? For me, the key to the answer to such questions lies in the understanding that, although God knows in advance the things we will do, it does not mean that he makes us do those things. If I watch a video of my children that I’ve already seen, I know what they’re going to do next, but that does not mean that I made them do it. The choice was theirs and they, not I, are responsible for their actions, whether good or bad. The only difference with God is that he doesn’t need a video because he’s omniscient.

But returning directly to our passage, one of the saddest things we learn about Judas is his hypocrisy. When Jesus tells his disciples that one of them will betray him, all the disciples, including Judas, say, Surely not I? or Surely you don’t mean me? And Matthew adds a detail not shared with us by Mark. In Matthew, Judas is the last to say it. He says it after all the others, as if reluctant or ashamed to do so. He knew what he was doing was wrong, but he did it anyway. And in Matthew all the other disciples call Jesus Lord, but Judas calls him Rabbi or Teacher. He had already made the decision that Jesus was no longer Lord in his life.

But Jesus knew all this. He knew that he would be betrayed. He knew who would betray him and he knew what would happen to him. But why didn’t he try to stop Judas? Because he knew that scripture must be fulfilled, he knew why it was necessary for him to die, and he knew that ultimately God would vindicate him.

He knew that scripture must be fulfilled

In verses 20-21, after each of the disciples have said, Surely not I? Jesus says:

It is one of the Twelve, …one who dips bread into the bowl with me. The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

This is probably a reference to Psalm 41:9 where David says:

Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.

Of course, this is not the only detail that the Scriptures predicted about what would happen to Jesus. Again and again the Gospel writers make reference to Old Testament verses that they saw fulfilled in the life of Jesus, especially regarding events surrounding the time of his death. But the important thing to notice here is that Jesus knew that Scripture must be fulfilled. He had confidence in its authority. Through his close relationship with his heavenly Father, he knew which verses applied prophetically to him. And he conducted his life accordingly. And if we really want to be his disciples, we should surely follow his example.

He knew that he was going to die and why it was necessary

We’ve seen in previous talks that there were several occasions when Jesus already told his disciples that he was going to die. In fact, in Luke 24:7, after his death and resurrection, while talking to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, he reminds them how he had told them while he was still with them in Galilee, that:

The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified, and on the third day rise again.

And then they remembered his words. We know from all we have seen so far, how bad the disciples were at remembering. And so, to help them, and us, to remember his death, he instituted the meal that came to be known as The Lord’s Supper, or Holy Communion, or the Eucharist. That its primary purpose was to help us to remember is made clear in 1 Corinthians 11:24-25 where we’re told to eat and drink in remembrance of Jesus.

So the bread and wine are simply memorials, aids to memory. When Jesus said , This is my body (v22) and This is my blood (v24) he never intended it to be taken literally. The bread doesn’t turn into his body as we eat it, nor does the wine turn into his blood as we drink it. Why am I so sure about this? Because the bread he gave his disciples at the last supper clearly did not turn into his body then, neither did the wine turn into his blood. His blood was still throbbing in his veins! And Jesus said, This IS my blood. He did not say, This WILL BECOME my blood (after I have died and risen again). Just as the Passover meal was a memorial of how the Lord had delivered his people from Egypt, so the bread and wine are memorials of what Jesus has done for us. They remind us of the new covenant that God has made with us through the shedding of Jesus’ blood. (For more on this, see You’d Better Believe It, Ch. 14).

Yes, Jesus knew he was going to die, and why it was necessary. That’s why he was determined to see it through, and he gives thanks (vv22-23) for it. How could he do so? Because he loved God and wanted to do his will. Because he loved his disciples and wanted them to be saved. And because he knew that God would vindicate him.

He knew that God would vindicate him

Notice what he says in verse 25:

I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God.

He knew that he would die, but he knew that his death would not be the end. He knew that God would vindicate him. He would enter the kingdom of God. He knew of the joy that lay ahead. Hebrews 12:1-2 tells us that:

For the joy that was set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

And he knew that he would share that joy with us! Matthew 26:29 includes two words that Mark has left out. Here Jesus says that he will drink it new with you. But let’s finish by considering the meaning of that little word anew. In Greek it’s kainon. Its basic meaning is new, but in the context here it means of a new character or species. Mark uses it this way in:

· 1:27 when the people apply it to Jesus’ teaching because he taught with authority

· 2:21-22 when Jesus says that no one puts new wine into old wineskins to illustrate that he had come to introduce something entirely new that would not only break free from the old (Judaism) and, if it didn’t, would ultimately destroy it (See Talk 8).

· 14:24 where Jesus says that the wine is the blood of the new covenant

· 16:17 where Jesus says that those who believe will speak with new tongues.

All these verses suggest that Jesus is using the word new to mean something of a different and better quality than we have known before. He came to introduce a new and better covenant and in the kingdom of God things, even the wine, will be new and better. And it’s available to us just because Jesus was willing to be betrayed, denied, forsaken by all his disciples, and to go to Calvary to die for us. So in this talk we have seen five things that Jesus clearly knew:

· He knew the details of where they would eat the Passover

· He knew what Judas would do and what would happen to him

· He knew that scripture must be fulfilled

· He knew that he was going to die and why it was necessary

· He knew that God would vindicate him.

And if we have acknowledged Jesus as our Lord and Saviour, we can be certain of our own future too.

View Details

Talk 41 Mark 14:1-11 Mary’s Extravagant Worship

Welcome to Talk 41 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. We’ve now reached Chapter 14 which records the events immediately before the crucifixion of Jesus which Mark describes in Chapter 15. Today we'll be looking at Mark 14:1-11 where we read how:

the Jewish leaders are still looking for a way to arrest Jesus and kill him (vv1-2),
a woman anoints Jesus with a very expensive perfume which Jesus says she has done to prepare for his burial (vv3-9),
and Judas goes to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them (vv10-11).

We’ll be concentrating on verses 3-9 and considering what we can learn from this woman’s extravagant devotion and how we can apply it to our worship today. But first, to put this passage in its context, it will be helpful to outline the contents of the rest of the chapter:

12-26 The Last Supper

27-31 Jesus predicts that Peter will deny him

32-42 Jesus prays in the garden of Gethsemane

43-52 Jesus is arrested

53-65 Jesus is tried before the Sanhedrin

66-72 Peter denies Jesus.

So today’s passage is firmly set in the context of Jesus’ imminent death on the cross:

1. Now the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were only two days away, and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some sly way to arrest Jesus and kill him. 2. "But not during the Feast," they said, "or the people may riot."

3. While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure nard. She broke the jar and poured the perfume on his head.

4. Some of those present were saying indignantly to one another, "Why this waste of perfume? 5. It could have been sold for more than a year's wages and the money given to the poor." And they rebuked her harshly.

6. "Leave her alone," said Jesus. "Why are you bothering her? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 7. The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want. But you will not always have me. 8. She did what she could. She poured perfume on my body beforehand to prepare for my burial. 9. I tell you the truth, wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her."

10. Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them. 11. They were delighted to hear this and promised to give him money. So he watched for an opportunity to hand him over.

Bearing in mind the frequent references to the Jewish leaders’ constant hostile attitude to Jesus (e.g. Mark 3:6, 8:11, 10:2, 12:13), we’re not surprised that they are looking for some sly way to arrest Jesus and kill him (v1), and that they are delighted to hear of Judas’ willingness to betray him (vv10-11). Whatever their different motives, Judas and the Jewish leaders were all looking for their opportunity (cf. vv1 and 11). How different was the motivation of the woman, who wanted to express her devotion to Jesus while she still had the opportunity. In John 12 she is identified as Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus, and as I read this passage I am challenged by the extravagance of her worship. I trust you will be too.

Bethany lies on the opposite slope of the Mount of Olives to Jerusalem. You may remember that in Chapter 11 Jesus and his disciples were staying in Bethany and travelling into Jerusalem each day. The day of Passover, the day when Jesus was crucified, was only two days away, and Mary expresses her love for Jesus by breaking open a jar of perfume worth more than a year’s wages (v5) and anointing Jesus with it.

In doing so, she was showing how much Jesus meant to her, and that is surely what should lie at the heart of our worship. We are telling Jesus how much we love him. From this one verse there is so much we can learn about worship.

Our worship should be motivated by love

In John’s account the story of Mary’s worship comes at the beginning of Chapter 12 immediately after the raising of Lazarus in Chapter 11. We need look no further for a reason why Mary acted in the way she did. Jesus had shown his love for her by raising her brother from the dead. Of course she was grateful. Of course she loved him. 1 John 4:19 tells us that we love (him) because he first loved us.

Our worship should be uninhibited

Mary was not concerned about what others might think about her. There is almost an abandoned recklessness about her actions. Who cares about what it cost? Who cares what others might think? Who cares what they might say? She loved Jesus, and nothing and nobody would stop her expressing her love and her gratitude to him.

Hopefully you worship in a church where not everything is dictated from the front and where there is ample opportunity for spontaneous expressions of praise from members in the congregation. For more on this, see my book, When you come together – God’s plans for when his people meet. But even in churches where opportunity is given for individual expressions of praise and thanksgiving, in my experience relatively few participate in this way. Perhaps we need to be more like Mary, cast aside any inhibitions we might have, and publicly tell Jesus how much we love him.

Of course, we all have different personalities. We’re not all like Mary. Some of us are more like Martha, who expressed her love for Jesus by serving him and offering hospitality to others. So be yourself in the way you worship. There’s no need to copy others!

Our worship can be expressed by actions without words

There is no mention in this story of Mary saying anything. But her action is worth a thousand words. In Romans 12:1-2 Paul challenges us, in the light of God’s great love for us, to offer our bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God. This he says is a spiritual act of worship, or as the old AV says, our reasonable service. We show our love for God not only by our words, but by our deeds. How can we not love him when we remember all he has done for us? And because we love him, we are able to love others too. Acts of loving service to others are an expression of our love for him.

Our worship should be our lifestyle, not just limited to what we do in church on Sundays

Mary was worshipping Jesus in someone’s home, not in the synagogue and not on the Sabbath. Whenever and wherever we are, our lifestyle should be an expression of our devotion to the Lord Jesus. Notice what Paul says in Colossians 3:16-17:

16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, as you sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. 17 And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Verse 16 seems to refer to when we are gathered as a church. We are to remember what Christ has taught us. We are to teach and admonish one another. We are to sing with gratitude in our hearts. But verse 17 takes us beyond what happens in church to our everyday living. Whatever we do, we are to do it with gratitude to God for all that Jesus has done for us. That certainly applies to what we do in church, but our whole life should be an expression of what we profess in church. Worship should be our lifestyle.

Our worship may cost us something

There was, of course, an immediate financial cost to Mary’s worship – more than a year’s wages. But it also cost her the criticism and condemnation of some of those who watched her.

John’s account identifies one of those present as Judas. One lesson we can learn from these verses is that concerns about cash can lead to distraction from Christ. If our hearts are not right it’s all too easy to criticise the way that others worship Jesus. Notice how one thought can lead to an outright attack on someone else’s integrity. Judas’s heart wasn’t right. This led to a critical thought in his mind. Then it was vocalised, and he discovered he wasn’t the only one thinking that way, and so they ganged up on Mary and rebuked her harshly. It’s not only wrong to criticise others in this way, it can have serious consequences. Remember Michal?

But even if we recognise that it’s wrong to criticise others for the way they worship God, that doesn’t mean that others will not sometimes criticise us. And that’s something we should be prepared for. If we really love Jesus and want to tell him so publicly, we shouldn’t hold back for fear that people will find fault with what we say or the way we say it. Hebrews 13:15 tells us that we should continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise – the fruit of lips that confess his name. Mary was criticised for her worship, but the compensation she received for it was the approval of Jesus.

Our worship brings delight to the heart of Jesus

Notice how Jesus defends Mary from their criticism. What Mary had done she had done for him. And Jesus knows it. He says, She has done a beautiful thing to me. Jesus should always be the reason for our worship. Mary had not broken that jar of perfume over him to show others how much she loved him. She did it for him. And he commends her for it. A single word of commendation from Jesus more than compensates for a thousand words of criticism from others.

Notice too that Jesus says, She has done what she could. Mary had taken the opportunity while she could, while Jesus was still physically with her, to express her devotion to him. And all he asks of us is that we do what we can, whether it’s in worship or in witnessing to others. He doesn’t ask more, but he does expect us to do what we can.

And sometimes, whether we realise it or not, there may a prophetic dimension to what we say or do. As one of Jesus’ close disciples, Mary would surely have heard his frequent predictions of his death, but it’s not clear that she knew quite how soon Jesus was to be crucified. What is clear is that her actions had a prophetic significance. She was anointing Jesus’ body beforehand to prepare for his burial. If we act or speak out of love for Jesus, although we may not realise it at the time, God can speak powerfully and prophetically through us. I can’t remember how many times people have told me, after the event, how what I have said has impacted them greatly, and yet I may have completely forgotten what I had said or had no idea at the time how relevant it would be for them.

And finally, we need to remind ourselves that Mary’s act of devotion was done in the context of Jesus’ death. That’s what her actions prophetically proclaimed. The cross was the reason for her worship, and it is surely ours too. We worship God for many things, but in the final analysis, all our love for him and all our devotion to him are because of the cross. I love Jesus because he loved me enough to die on the cross to save me from my sins. That’s why I’m living for him. Love so amazing, so divine, demands my soul, my life, my all.

View Details

Talk 40 Mark 13:24-37 Signs of His Coming?

Welcome to Talk 40 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Last time we were looking at Mark 13:1-23 and considering some of the problems in interpreting this difficult chapter. I suggested that most of what Jesus says in that passage relates primarily to the events that would occur around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, which Jesus so accurately predicted in verses 1-4. Today we’re considering the rest of chapter 13, verses 24-37, where, as we shall see, some verses are by no means easy to understand. But let’s begin by reading verses 24-31.

24"But in those days, following that distress, "'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; 25 the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.' 26 "At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

28 "Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 29 Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door. 30 I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

Before we get into the passage let me remind you of what I said last time about difficulties interpreting the whole chapter. This will be a very brief summary, so, if you haven’t yet listened to, or read the notes on, last week’s talk, I recommend that you do so before going any further.

The first problem arises from the fact that Jesus is answering two questions asked by the disciples at the beginning of the chapter and it’s not always easy to decide which part of Jesus’ answer refers to which question. Is this verse talking about the destruction of the temple or does it refer to the second coming?

The second difficulty is deciding which parts of Jesus’ answer are to be taken literally and which are to be taken symbolically. In my view, much of the chapter is to be understood literally, but some verses must be intended to be understood symbolically or metaphorically.

In attempting to resolve these difficulties, I said that the first thing we must do is to find out more about the context, and I gave a brief description of what we know from history about the horrendous events that occurred surrounding the time of the destruction of the temple in AD70. So now, in today’s talk, I want to do three things:

· Examine two very different interpretations of verses 24-31.

· Emphasise why it’s a mistake to be constantly looking for signs of the Lord’s return (vv.32-37).

· Summarise what lessons we have learnt from the chapter as a whole.

Verses 24-31 Two different interpretations

Interpretations of these verses fall into two main categories:

a) Those who see most or all of this passage as referring to the second coming

b) Those who understand most or all of the passage to refer to the events around AD70.

Clearly these are two very different points of view, and we won’t have time to deal with them in great detail. So what I’m going to do is summarise four main arguments that seem to support the view that this passage relates to the second coming, and alongside them to state a counter argument that is sometimes made by those who take the alternative view. It is not my intention to be dogmatic, and, in fact, part of my purpose is to encourage you to form your own conclusions, but not to be too dogmatic, whatever your view may be.

1) In Matthew’s account one of the questions the disciples asked Jesus was about the second coming (Matthew 24:3). We would, therefore, expect that at least part of Jesus’ answer would relate to the second coming.

HOWEVER, one problem with this argument is that in verse 30 Jesus says, I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. So these verses, it is argued, cannot refer to the second coming unless Jesus himself mistakenly believed that the second coming would take place within a generation of his making the statement, which it clearly did not, but the fall of Jerusalem certainly did!

2) The events described in vv.24-25 would appear to be unique in world history. They are the kind of things one might expect at the end of the age and verse 27 talks of the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.

HOWEVER, in Daniel 7:13-14 we read:

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshipped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

So, it is argued, in its original context, the Son of Man is coming to God and could well refer to Jesus’ ascension into Heaven rather than his coming from Heaven. Moreover, it’s difficult to see how Jesus could have intended us to understand phrases like the stars will fall from the sky (v25) literally. The terminology used in these verses is reminiscent of the poetic language used by the Old Testament prophets and should be interpreted symbolically. And in light of the fact that they were to be fulfilled within a generation, this, it is argued, is the best way to interpret them.

3) If the fig tree mentioned in verse 28 refers to Israel as it appears to in Mark 11:20-25, then the passage must relate to the end times when, according to this view, the full number of Gentiles has come in and all Israel shall be saved (Romans 11:25-26, cf. Luke 21:24).

HOWEVER, there is no need to assume that the mention of the fig tree refers to Israel on this occasion. Jesus could equally well have meant that, just as you know that when the leaves of a fig tree start to come out, the summer is near, so be absolutely sure that, when you see the things I have been talking about begin to happen, the dreadful events that will take place at the destruction of Jerusalem will soon come to pass.

4) In verse 31 Jesus says that Heaven and earth will pass away, which suggests that the passage relates to the time of the end.

HOWEVER, the point that Jesus is making in this verse is that whatever happens, his words will never fail. There is a clear claim to deity here. Who else but God could make such a claim? Jesus is the truth (John 14:6). You can rely on everything he says, whether it be about the second coming or the destruction of Jerusalem, or anything else, for that matter.

So that concludes my summary of two very different interpretations of verses 24-31, and in my view it would be unwise to take a dogmatic position on either side. There are some passages of Scripture that are open to more than one possible interpretation. However, when we come to verses 32-37 it seems obvious, to me at least, that these verses must relate to the second coming, as a comparison with the parallel passage in Matthew 24:36-44 clearly indicates.

Verses 32-37 Only the Father knows the timing, so don’t look for signs, but be ready

32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come. 34 It's like a man going away: He leaves his house and puts his servants in charge, each with his assigned task, and tells the one at the door to keep watch. 35 "Therefore keep watch because you do not know when the owner of the house will come back – whether in the evening, or at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or at dawn. 36 If he comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping. 37 What I say to you, I say to everyone: 'Watch!'"

As I have already said, the parallel passage in Matthew 24 makes it clear that it relates to the second coming. Jesus says:

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man (vv37-39).

This cannot possibly refer to the coming of the Son of Man described in Daniel 7, which as we have seen may well be better understood to be a reference to Jesus’ ascension into Heaven rather than his return from it. But in these verses Jesus is clearly referring to his second coming which will be as unexpected as the flood was in the time of Noah.

However, unlike Noah, who was told on what day God would send the rain, no-one will know the timing of the Lord’s return. Jesus said that even he did not know. And if Jesus didn’t know, I wonder why some Christians seem to think that they can work it out! But it’s sometimes said in response to this criticism that it was only the day and the hour that we cannot know. But in the next verse Jesus says, You do not know when that time will come. The Greek word for time here is kairos, which does not refer to the time of day, but means season. This is backed up by what Jesus reiterated in in Acts 1:7 when he told his disciples:

It's not for you to know the times or the seasons which the Father has put under his own authority.

So why does Jesus tell us to Be alert! Be on guard! Watch!? The answer is simple. He doesn’t mean watch for signs. He means Stay awake! Be alert (v33) literally means, Don’t go to sleep. It’s used of the disciples in Gethsemane whom Jesus found sleeping, and here in verse 36 Jesus says, If he (the Son of Man) comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping. And the word for watch in verses 34, 35, and 37 means Keep awake, be vigilant. It’s used elsewhere in the New Testament in connection with:

· Not letting the enemy break through (Luke 12:39)

· Standing firm in the faith and being strong (1 Corinthians 16:13)

· Keeping awake in prayer (Colossians 4:2)

· Being sober and vigilant because the enemy goes about like a roaring lion… (1 Peter 5:8)

· Staying awake and not being found naked and shamefully exposed when the Lord returns (Revelation 16:15).

So, when the Lord tells us to watch, he is not telling us to watch for signs. He’s saying that because we do not know when he will return, we need to be in a permanent state of readiness. And we can do that without constantly looking for signs. We can do it by living lives that please him and by using the gifts and talents he has given us (Matthew 25:14-30). We should concentrate on telling others about him, not trying to know what Jesus has told us is not for us to know (Acts 1:6-8).

Lessons we can learn from the whole chapter

So now, as we draw to a close our discussion on this difficult chapter, let’s remind ourselves of some of the lessons we have learnt. I have pointed out that the problems of interpretation arise from two factors, 1) deciding which of the disciples’ two questions in verse 4 Jesus is answering at any point in the chapter, and 2) determining when the language he is using is meant to be understood literally or symbolically.

Because of these difficulties, I have suggested that it would be unwise to be dogmatic, but that perhaps verses 5-23 should be seen as largely relating to Jesus’ prophecy of destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, that verses 24-31 are open to either interpretation depending mainly on whether one sees 24-27 as literal or symbolic, and that verses 32-37 relate very definitely to the second coming.

However, despite the difficulties, I do believe that the principles that Jesus teaches in all three sections are relevant to all Christians throughout the history of the church, and so I want to conclude by reminding you of seven things that I have mentioned already, either in the last talk or in this. I hope that, whatever your view on the second coming, you will find yourself in agreement, at least with most of them.

· We must watch out for deceivers

· We must not be surprised by international turmoil and natural disasters

· We must expect to be persecuted

· We must continue to tell others about Jesus, relying on the help of the Holy Spirit

· We must not try to work out the timing of Christ’s coming, because it’s not for us to know

· We must stay awake, in a permanent state of readiness for the Lord’s return, because

· THE LORD IS CERTAINLY COMING and, if we’re ready, we simply do not need to know when.

Finally, as I mentioned last time, we’ll be taking a break for the rest of August, and our series on Mark will continue, God willing, in September.

View Details

Talk 39 Mark 13:1-23 Jesus prophesies the destruction of the temple

Welcome to Talk 39 in our series on Mark's gospel. Today we're looking at chapter 13:1-23 where Jesus prophesies the destruction of the temple. We’ll deal with verses 24-37 next time. This is a difficult chapter, not least because of the strong convictions some Christians hold about it, but my intention is not to make dogmatic assertions about how it should be interpreted, but to point out some of the problems of interpreting it and to see what key lessons we can learn from it for ourselves today.

As we shall see, despite the NIV heading, Signs of the End of the Age, much of this chapter is not about the second coming of Christ, but about what Christians should do leading up to the destruction of the temple in AD70. That is not to say that none of the chapter relates to the second coming, but I want to confess at the outset my own personal scepticism about using passages like this to try to predict when the Lord may return. This is based on three things:

Firstly, the Lord himself said in verse 32:

No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Secondly, he also said in Acts 1:7, just before he ascended into Heaven:

It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

Jesus told his disciples not to be concerned with such things but to get on with the task of world evangelisation.

And thirdly, my scepticism is based on the fact that so many attempts to calculate the timing of his coming have proved wrong. It’s not only the Jehovah’s Witnesses who have made predictions which they have been compelled to recalculate, but sincere Christians like William Miller, a Baptist farmer, who, based on his understanding of Daniel’s prophecy, was convinced that Jesus would return on a particular day in 1842 and then readjusted his calculations to the same day in 1843. He later admitted that he was wrong but said that, if he had his time all over again, he would still have arrived at the same conclusion!

And even in my own lifetime I have seen Christians making radical changes to their lifestyle, based on events taking place in and around Israel, as those of you who may remember the Six Day War may remember. But, having expressed my scepticism, let me now make it clear that I certainly do believe in the return of the Lord Jesus! In Acts 1, immediately after Jesus had told the disciples that it was not for them to know the timing of his coming, we read in verses 9-11:

After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. 10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 "Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."

His return will be personal, physical, and visible. Of this we can be certain. But it’s not for us to know when. So, with all this in mind let’s now make a start on our passage in Mark 13. We’ll begin by considering two difficulties that make this chapter particularly hard to interpret, before looking at the historical context in which it is set.

Interpreting the passage

The first problem arises from the two questions the disciples ask Jesus in the opening verses.

1 As he was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!" 2 "Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." 3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"

So, in verse 1, one of them draws Jesus’ attention to the size and beauty of the temple, to which Jesus replies in verse 2:

Do you see all these great buildings? Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

Then Peter, James, John and Andrew ask him privately,

When will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled? (v4).

So, Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple and the disciples ask him when it’s going to happen and what sign there will be. Notice that here there is no reference to the second coming of Jesus. However, it’s clear from Matthew’s account that his disciples clearly connected very closely the destruction of the temple with the return of the Lord, because they ask him they ask him:

When will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age? (Matthew 24:3).

So, in his reply, Jesus is answering two questions, which in the disciples’ minds are closely related, one about the destruction of the temple and the other about the second coming. But when we try to interpret the passage, it’s not always clear which parts of Jesus’ answer relate to which of these two questions. What does seem clear is that much of Jesus’ answer related to the destruction of the temple and not to the second coming. How much, if any, refers to the second coming is a matter of debate. But more of that later.

The second difficulty that arises when we seek to interpret the chapter is deciding which parts are to be taken literally and which are to be taken symbolically. Although much of the passage is, in my view, clearly to be understood literally – for example it’s hard to see how let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains (v14) can be interpreted symbolically – some verses must surely be intended to be understood symbolically or metaphorically.

For example, as we shall see next time, the stars will fall from the sky (v25) can hardly be taken literally any more than the moon will be turned into blood in Acts 2:20. Such expressions need to be understood as symbolizing cataclysmic events the like of which have never been seen before. But how can we decide which way to understand any given verse? Literally or symbolically? Part of the answer at least lies in the historical context in which the passage is set.

We began by saying that what Jesus says in this chapter is in answer to questions about the destruction of the temple, which the disciples associated with the return of the Lord. To me much, if not all, of Jesus’ answer relates to the destruction of the temple, indeed, of Jerusalem itself. So what do we know from history about this?

The historical context

It all began in a single year when in AD 69 four Roman emperors succeeded one another, each time with violence, murder and civil war. In AD 70 Titus, the adopted son of Vespasian, the last of these emperors, entered Jerusalem, burnt the temple, destroyed the city and crucified thousands of Jews. The Jewish historian Josephus tells us how, during the siege of Jerusalem, people were starving and ate their own babies to stay alive, how they fought each other for scraps of dirty food, and how more Jews were killed by other Jews than by the invading Romans. If you want to learn more about this, just google AD70 Siege of Jerusalem.

Examining verses 5-23

Bearing in mind, then, the horrific events that would take place in AD 70, let’s now attempt to solve the riddle of which verses refer to the destruction of Jerusalem and which, if any, refer to the second coming. We’ll begin with verses 5-23 which, it seems to me, refer mainly to the years leading up to and shortly after the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, although some may possibly have a wider significance. I say this because of the immediate context. Jesus has predicted the destruction of the temple and is now replying to the disciples’ question in verse 4:

When will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled? (i.e. the destruction of the temple).

Jesus’ answer in verses 5-23 contains warnings about what was shortly to happen and instructions on what they should do which can be summarised as follows:

· Watch out for deceivers (vv. 5-6, 21-22)

· Don’t be surprised by international turmoil and natural disasters (vv. 7-8)

· Expect to be persecuted (vv. 9-14)

· Take appropriate action when the time comes near (vv. 16-23).

Watch out for deceivers (vv. 5-6, 21-22)

5 Jesus said to them: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 6 Many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and will deceive many.

21 At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'Look, there he is!' do not believe it. 22 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect – if that were possible.

Of course, the verses could refer to any time in church history including the period leading up to the Lord’s return, but, bearing in mind the context in which they are set, it seems that Jesus’ primary intention was to warn his disciples about what would happen in their own lifetime.

Don’t be surprised by international turmoil and natural disasters (vv. 7-8)

7 When you hear of wars and rumours of wars, do not be alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 8 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in various places, and famines. These are the beginning of birth pains.

It’s easy to assume, as many have, that these things are to be taken as signs of Jesus’ near return, but again the context suggests otherwise. In fact all these things have been happening throughout church history, and are certainly very evident right now, but Jesus does not say the end is near. He says the end is still to come. And as we shall see next time, at the end of the chapter Jesus says you do not know. We won’t know when he is coming, and that’s precisely why we need to be ready!

Expect to be persecuted (vv. 9-14)

9 "You must be on your guard. You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. 10 And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. 11 Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say whatever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit. 12 "Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 13 All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 "When you see 'the abomination that causes desolation' standing where it does not belong – let the reader understand – then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

Again, all these things could be said of almost any period in church history. They were certainly relevant during the lifetime of the disciples and no doubt will be right up until the time of the Lord’s return, so there is no need to see them as exclusively relevant to the second coming. But there are two things in this passage I feel I need to make special comment on, as in people’s thinking they are usually associated with and seen as signs of the second coming.

The first is in verse 10, where Jesus says, The gospel must first be preached to all nations. The Greek word for first is proton. This can mean either first in time or first in importance, or both. The immediate context in Mark, where Jesus is talking about his disciples being persecuted as they witness for him, suggests to me that he is stressing the importance of preaching the gospel whatever happens.

And, of course, this is applicable throughout the church age and is something Jesus emphasises in Acts 1:6-8. This is so important that the end will not come until the gospel is preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations (Matthew 24:14). So this verse does have a very real application to the second coming, but Jesus is stressing the importance of worldwide evangelisation rather than seeing it as a sign of his coming!

The second is in verse 14 where Jesus says:

When you see 'the abomination that causes desolation' standing where it does not belong – let the reader understand – then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

So what is this abomination that causes desolation? It was first prophesied in Daniel 9:27 and is believed by some to have been fulfilled in 168 BC when Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificed a pig to Zeus on the temple altar. However, since this took place before the coming of Jesus, it cannot be what he was referring to which was yet future.

Bearing in mind the context it’s far more likely that Jesus was referring to what happened in AD70 when the Roman general Titus placed an idol on the site of the burnt-out temple just a few years after the destruction of Jerusalem. That, of course, does not rule out the possibility of another fulfilment in the future, but in my view the Bible is by no means clear about this, and it would be unwise to be dogmatic.

Take appropriate action when the time comes near (vv. 15-23).

15 Let no one on the roof of his house go down or enter the house to take anything out.

16 Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. 17 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 18 Pray that this will not take place in winter, 19 because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now – and never to be equaled again. 20 If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. 21 At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'Look, there he is!' do not believe it. 22 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect – if that were possible. 23 So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.

At the time of the destruction of Jerusalem the danger was imminent. Jesus’ instructions are specifically related to that situation. The basic message is, Get out quick! Don’t let anything delay you! You will never have seen anything like it! Things are going to be terrible! Don’t let anyone deceive you or distract you! But now it’s time for me to summarise my understanding of how these verses apply to us today:

1) Because these verses apply initially to the period before AD70, they contain some specific instructions (e.g. vv. 15-18) that relate only to that period.

2) However, since what the disciples were about to experience then were only the beginning of birth pains (v. 8), it follows that similar things would continue to happen throughout the whole church age and that, with the exception of the specific instructions I have just referred to, the broad principles of what Jesus was teaching continue to be relevant to us today.

3) Because what Jesus is teaching here has been relevant throughout church history, there is no need to see the whole passage as relating directly to the second coming.

4) The parts that do appear to have a bearing on it must not be interpreted as signs, something which Jesus makes clear in the closing verses of the chapter, as we shall see next time.

View Details

Talk 38 Mark 12:35-44 Jesus warns against the Teachers of the Law

Welcome to Talk 38 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 12:35-44. So far in this chapter, Jesus has faced questions from Herodians, Pharisees, and Sadducees, all of whom have been trying to trick him into giving an answer that might give them grounds for taking action against him. But on every occasion Jesus’ answers have silenced his opponents.

Now, in today’s passage, Jesus:

· asks them all a question which they are unable to answer (35-37)

· warns the people to beware of these hypocritical teachers of the law (38-40)

· and draws a contrast between their self-seeking behaviour and the generosity of a poor widow (41-44).

35 While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, "How is it that the teachers of the law say that the Christ is the son of David? 36 David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared: "'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet."' 37 David himself calls him 'Lord.' How then can he be his son?" The large crowd listened to him with delight.

Jesus’ purpose in asking this question is not to catch his opponents out as they had tried to catch him out. His purpose was not retaliation, but to make them and the others listening think. As we shall see, the implications of his question are enormous. They reveal, without a shadow of a doubt, who Jesus really is. The teachers of the law had rightly understood that the Scriptures predicted that the Christ, God’s Anointed One, the Messiah, would be a son (i.e. a descendant) of King David. This view was widely held by the Jews at the time of Jesus, and Jesus is not disputing it. But what he is saying is this:

If the Christ really is to be a son of David (which he certainly is), how is it that David refers to him as his Lord?

Jesus is referring to Psalm 110:1 which says:

The Lord says to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet’.

This psalm was widely held to be messianic (i.e. prophesying about the Messiah). But, asks Jesus, if David is speaking of the coming Messiah, how can he call him my Lord if he is one of his descendants? It would be unthinkable to a Jew that a child could be superior to its father, or a descendant superior to an ancestor. Matthew 22:46 makes it clear that the teachers of the law could not find an answer to this riddle, but the early Christians certainly knew it, as this very verse is quoted in Hebrews 1:13 where the writer is demonstrating the deity of Jesus. And this is what Jesus is trying to show them by his question. If the Messiah was to be David’s Lord, he must be more than a physical descendant. He must be none other than God himself. But that was a mystery that the Jewish leaders were completely unable to fathom.

Now, in the next section, verses 38-40, Jesus warns the people against the teachers of the law.

38 As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted in the marketplaces, 39 and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honour at banquets. 40 They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely."

The meaning of these verses is clear. The Jewish religious leaders – the majority, at least – were insincere and wrongly motivated. Note the words like to in verse 38. They enjoyed dressing differently, to show, as they thought, their superiority to others. They felt entitled to have the most important seats in the synagogues and places of honour at banquets. The motivation in all that they did was to be admired by others, and even their prayers were designed to impress others rather than to seek the blessing of God.

But Matthew’s account of what Jesus said is more detailed. In Matthew 23:3-7 Jesus makes the following accusations against the teachers of the law and the Pharisees.

They do not practise what they preach (v3)
They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders (v4)
Everything they do is done for men to see (v5)
They love the place of honour at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues (v6)
They love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them ‘Rabbi’ (v7).

And in verses 13-36 we read how Jesus again and again calls them hypocrites, blind guides, blind fools, blind men, and even describes them as you snakes, you brood of vipers! and warns them of the judgment to come as a result.

Of course, it’s easy enough for us to identify with Jesus’ condemnation of the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of his day, but I wonder how seriously church leaders today take Jesus’ words of instruction to us as his disciples. Notice what he says in verses 8-12:

But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. 9 And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 Nor are you to be called 'teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ. 11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

If you're wondering why Matthew includes these verses and Mark does not, it's important to remember that Mark was writing for a mainly Gentile audience whereas Matthew’s audience was largely Jewish. It was important that Christians with a Jewish background should understand that there was no room for such practices in the Church of Jesus Christ. And the Book of Acts and the New Testament epistles bear witness to the fact that Jesus’ forthright teaching in these verses was largely followed.

For example, unlike the practice in many churches today, the gifts mentioned in Ephesians 4:11 were never used as titles. Words like apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, and teacher described a gift God had given a person to fulfil a certain role in the church. They were not used as titles. Paul did not refer to himself as Apostle Paul but as Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ. Agabus was a prophet named Agabus, not Prophet Agabus. Philip is described as Philip, the evangelist, not Evangelist Philip, and so on. Interestingly, no one is named as a pastor in the New Testament. Pastor means shepherd and it was the elders who shepherded the churches in the New Testament. Yet today the term Pastor is frequently used as a title, a practice completely foreign to the spirit of the New Testament.

But does it matter? Isn’t the culture different today? Yes, it is. But we should align our practices with the teaching of the New Testament, not with the culture of the day, or even the culture prevalent in the church. The New Testament does teach us to respect and pray for our leaders, but the culture of honouring pastors in some churches is in danger of encouraging the very things that Jesus was so strongly condemning in these verses.

But it’s time to return to our passage in Mark 12. So far we’ve seen how Jesus asks the religious leaders a question which they are unable to answer, but which clearly implies his deity (35-37), and then warns the people to beware of these hypocritical teachers (38-40) and in Matthew’s account telling his disciples that it must not be so among them. Now, in the final section of the chapter Jesus draws a contrast between the self-seeking behaviour of the religious leaders and the generosity of a poor widow.

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny. 43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything – all she had to live on."

Perhaps you’ll remember that in verse 40 Jesus accused the teachers of the law of devouring widows’ houses. To understand this fully we need to realise that in those days widows had little or no power in the courts. A husband would appoint a scribe or Pharisee to be the executor of his widow’s estate. This gave them authority to deal with the widow’s estate and a corrupt lawyer could easily trick a widow out of her house. In doing this they were directly disobeying their beloved Law of Moses which clearly stated in Exodus 22:22, Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan. It’s not surprising that the word Pharisaical has become a synonym for hypocritical! No wonder Jesus said, Such men will be punished most severely.

So when he sees many rich people throwing large amounts of money into the temple treasury, Jesus takes the opportunity to compare their ostentatious behaviour with that of the Pharisees who prayed long prayers for a show, and to contrast it with the abandoned generosity of one poor widow. Note the contrasts between rich and poor, between one and many, between large amounts and only a fraction of a penny. Yet her offering was greater than all the wealth of all the others put together.

If, as we have seen, Jesus told his disciples not to behave like the Pharisees, here he is surely teaching them that they should follow the example of this poor widow. Her commitment was total. NIV translates the last few words of this chapter as everything – all she had to live on, but literally translated the Greek says her whole life! And that’s exactly what Jesus demands of his followers. Unless we deny ourselves and take up our cross and follow him we cannot be his disciples. And unlike the Pharisees he does not demand of us more than he himself was prepared to give. He threw in his whole life. It cost him everything he had.

So for us the challenge is not merely to avoid the hypocrisy of the Pharisees – and, if we’re honest, that’s not always as easy as it may sound – but to follow the example of the poor widow, whose prodigal giving is but a picture of the abandoned generosity of Jesus in giving his whole life for us.

As we have seen in previous talks, he was the fulfilment of what Israel was meant to be, he was the fulfilment of all that the temple stood for, and he was the fulfilment of the Law for he loved the Lord his God with all his heart and with all his mind, and with all his strength, and he loved us, his neighbours, enough to die for us.

Surely the least we can do, is live for him.

View Details

Talk 37 Mark 12:28-34 The Greatest Commandment

Welcome to Talk 37 in our series on Mark's gospel. Today we are considering Mark 12:28-34 where Jesus answers the question, Of all the commandments which is the most important? But before we read the passage it will be helpful to remind ourselves what has been taking place in recent chapters.

We have seen in Chapter 11 how Jesus cursed a fig tree which was not bearing fruit and I suggested that this was an enacted parable telling of God's rejection of Israel. This is confirmed by the parable of the tenants in the opening verses of chapter 12. We saw also how Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple, and I suggested that this was a prophetic action declaring that the end of temple worship was near.

We have also seen how these actions annoyed the Jewish religious leaders and how they asked him various questions in an attempt to trap him. The Herodians tried to trap him by asking him a question about paying taxes to Caesar. The Sadducees tried to catch him out with a trick question about a woman who had had 7 husbands, and they asked whose wife she would be in the resurrection. Now, in today's passage, one of the Pharisees asks him a question about the law.

Now there is an interesting verse in Acts 21:28 which is relevant to all this. There we read that Paul’s opponents shouted:

"Men of Israel, help us! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against our people and our law and this place. And besides, he has brought Greeks into the temple area and defiled this holy place."

This verse reveals three things which the Jewish leaders were most concerned about – Israel, the Law, and the Temple. But these three things were totally superseded by what Jesus came to do. The nation of Israel and the Jewish temple were superseded by the church as the true people of God, a living temple, comprised of all the Jews and Gentiles who came to believe in Jesus. But what about the Law? Well, that’s the subject of today’s passage:

28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"

29 "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' 31 The second is this: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these."

32"Well said, teacher," the man replied. "You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbour as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices."

34 When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.

We’ll take this a verse at a time.

28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"

We know from Matthew 22:34-40 that this teacher of the law was in fact a Pharisee. He heard Jesus’ answer to the Sadducees’ question about the resurrection and was clearly impressed by it. Remember, the Sadducees didn’t believe in the resurrection but the Pharisees did. So, seeing that the Sadducees had failed to catch Jesus out with their question, the Pharisees got together and decided to test Jesus with a question about the Law.

29 "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

Jesus answers by quoting two passages from the Pentateuch. He begins with what was known as the Shema which is found in Deuteronomy 6:4-5. This begins with a declaration about God:

Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

He is the one and only true and living God, and that’s why we should hear (i.e. obey) him. Perhaps the greatest reason that people do not obey God’s commandments is that either they do not believe he exists, or that they do not really understand who he is. Knowing who God is gives us the greatest incentive to love and obey him.

30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.'

This means that we are to love God with every faculty, every fibre, of our being. In Matthew’s account, Jesus describes this as the first and greatest commandment. In Mark it’s the most important one. At first sight this might sound a bit strange. Does God really ask us to love him more than our fellow human beings? Isn’t that selfish of God? Well, before we jump to that mistaken conclusion, let’s remind ourselves of two things.

First, we need to remember how much God loves us. He loved us so much that he gave his one and only Son to die on the cross to save us from our sins (John 3:16). God wants us to love him because he loves us so much. And, if you’ve ever been in love, you’ll know that, essential to the very nature of loving someone, you desperately want them to love you too. If you didn’t want them to love you, could you really say that you loved them?

And secondly, God knows that, if we truly love him, we will want to keep his commandment to love other people. It’s because Jesus loved God so much that he went to the cross. He knew it was God’s will, and he knew it was God’s will because he knew how much God loved us and wanted to save us. And, of course, Jesus went to the cross because he loved us too. There’s no conflict between loving God and loving others, because that’s exactly what God wants us to do. That’s why Jesus says the second is like it (Matthew 22:39). These two commandments are inextricably linked. You can’t love God without loving your neighbour – Whoever claims to love God, but hates a brother or sister is a liar (1 John 4:20).

31 The second is this: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these."

This is taken from Leviticus 19:18. First let’s consider what Jesus meant by 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' Let’s start with what it doesn’t mean. It doesn’t mean, as some have wrongly assumed, that Jesus is teaching us that we should love ourselves. I am aware that it’s often used this way to encourage people who, for one reason or another, have a low self-esteem, but neither in the original context of Leviticus 19:18, nor in the context of what Jesus was saying can this interpretation be justified. It’s a typical example of eisegesis, of reading into a text what you want it to mean. Christian counsellors must beware of using the methods of modern secular psychology. Using Scripture in this way can be dangerous, however much we may wish to encourage others. There are other ways to encourage such people without misusing Scripture – reminding them how much God loves them, for example.

But why am I so sure about this? Because, as we shall see in a moment, in Matthew’s account, immediately after saying, Love your neighbour as yourself, Jesus says that All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments (Matthew 22:39-40). But in Matthew 7:12 he says

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Putting these two passages together, we see that loving your neighbour as yourself means doing to others what you would have them do to you – and that presupposes that you love yourself.

So why does Jesus say as yourself? It seems to me that the obvious meaning is that we should love others as much as we love ourselves. Jesus knows that it’s human nature to love ourselves. The difficult thing can be loving others. Because of the tendency to sin we have inherited from our first parents, we are all basically selfish. This is very evident even in the behaviour of little children. They have to be taught to put others first, and that’s what Jesus is doing here.

But why does Jesus say, All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments? Because, if you really love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, and if you love your neighbour as yourself, you will keep all the commandments. Notice what James says:

If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself’, you are doing right (James 2:8).

Let me illustrate the point I’m making by referring to the Ten Commandments. The first four relate to God, the final six relate to our neighbours. If we really love God with every fibre of our being, we won’t need a written law to tell us not to worship other gods, not to make idols, and not to misuse God’s name. And we will remember to set aside time to rest and to worship him. And if we really love others as much as we love ourselves, we will honour our parents, and we won’t murder, commit adultery, steal, tell lies about them or covet their possessions. Perhaps you remember what St. Augustine of Hippo said: Love God, and do as you please. Because if you truly love God you will only do what pleases him.

Notice what Paul says in Galatians 5. After reminding them that the entire law regarding our relationships with others is summed up in the single command, Love your neighbour as yourself (v.14), he goes on to tell them to live by the Spirit (v16) and they will not gratify the desires of the flesh. And in verse 18 he says, If you are led by the Spirit you are not under the Law. Why? Because the fruit of the Spirit starts with love (v.22). But that brings us back to our passage and the reply the Pharisee gave to what Jesus had said.

According to Matthew’s account, the man’s purpose in asking Jesus the question was to test him, presumably hoping to catch him out by getting Jesus to say something against the law of Moses. Remember, Jesus had more than once overridden the authority of the law – or at least the Pharisees’ interpretation of it. But now the Pharisee, having weighed up Jesus’ answer, is compelled to acknowledge that Jesus is right.

When people ask us questions about what we believe as Christians, their motive may not always be genuine. But if we give them an honest answer there is always the possibility that they may come to admit that we’re right. They may be nearer the kingdom of God than we think.

34 When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.

In the previous verses we saw the man’s evaluation of what Jesus had said. In this verse we see Jesus’ evaluation of him. People have all kinds of different opinions about Jesus, but in the final analysis Jesus will have the last word. It’s his evaluation of us that determines our final destiny. Jesus said that the man was not far from the kingdom of God. But he did not say he was in it. We don’t know if this man ever entered it, was ever born again (John 3:3). It’s one thing to admit that something Jesus has said is right. It’s quite another to acknowledge who he is!

However, perhaps this man did finally come to a full realisation of the truth about Jesus. It’s clear from Acts 15:5 that some of the Pharisees had become believers in Jesus and were part of the church in Jerusalem, even if they were still struggling with the idea that Gentile believers did not need to be circumcised! It may still take some time after we become Christians to break away from the unbiblical traditions we have grown up with.

But let’s finish by asking why Jesus said that the man was not far from the kingdom of God. It was undoubtedly because the man had understood that the attitude of our heart is far more important than religious observance. There is no religious ceremony or ritual that can save us, whether it be the Old Testament sacrificial system, or Christian baptism or confirmation, or church attendance, or pilgrimage. When we understand that, we are not far from the kingdom of God, but we can only enter it by personal faith in Christ as our Saviour. And if we really believe that he loved us enough to die for us, we will love him with all our being, we will only do what we know is pleasing to him, and we will love others because we know he loves them too.

View Details

Talk 36 Mark 12:1-27 Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders

Welcome to Talk 36 in our series on Mark's gospel. In our last two talks we were considering the meaning of Jesus cleansing the temple and of his cursing the fig tree in Chapter 11. I suggested that, rather than cleansing the temple, Jesus was by his actions declaring the beginning of the end of worship in the temple, because that was soon to be replaced by the living temple, the church. I also suggested that's the cursing of the fig tree was, in a similar way, an enacted parable declaring God's rejection of Israel as his people.

Today's passage, Mark 12:1-17, continues Jesus’ confrontation with the Jewish religious leaders, firstly in the form of a parable, and then in the account of two specific encounters, (1) with the Pharisees and Herodians, and (2) with the Sadducees, all of whom were bitterly opposed to Jesus. First then, the parable of the tenants.

As I mentioned this briefly last time, and because its meaning is so obvious, I shall devote little time to it today, especially as it is dealing with much the same subject as we were dealing with in the last two talks. But let’s begin by reading it.

The Parable of the Tenants (vv.1-12)

He then began to speak to them in parables: "A man planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a pit for the winepress and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey. 2 At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. 3 But they seized him, beat him and sent him away empty-handed. 4 Then he sent another servant to them; they struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully. 5 He sent still another, and that one they killed. He sent many others; some of them they beat, others they killed. 6 "He had one left to send, a son, whom he loved. He sent him last of all, saying, 'They will respect my son.' 7 "But the tenants said to one another, 'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.' 8 So they took him and killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard. 9 "What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and kill those tenants and give the vineyard to others. 10 Haven't you read this scripture: "'The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; 11 the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes'?" 12 Then they looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left him and went away.

As I say, the meaning of this parable is extremely clear:

· The man who planted the vineyard, the owner, symbolises God

· The vineyard is Israel

· The tenants are the Jewish leaders – and they knew it (v12)

· The servants sent to them are the OT prophets and John the Baptist

· The son of the owner is Jesus

· The ‘others’ to whom the owner gives the vineyard are the Gentiles.

This last point is not made clear in the passage but is in harmony with Paul’s teaching in Romans 11 which we looked at last time. So the parable confirms the line we have been taking in our last two talks.

Jesus concludes with a quote from Psalm 118:22-23. He himself is the stone the builders rejected and has become the most important stone in the building of the new temple which was to be his church. The builders who rejected him were the Jewish leaders – see Acts 4:11 where Peter applies this same scripture directly to them (see also 1 Peter 2:4-8). No wonder the Jewish leaders were looking for a way to arrest Jesus. Which introduces us to the next section.

An Encounter with the Pharisees and Herodians - Paying Taxes to Caesar (vv13-17)

13 Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14 They came to him and said, "Teacher, we know you are a man of integrity. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn't we?" But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. "Why are you trying to trap me?" he asked. "Bring me a denarius and let me look at it." 16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. 17 Then Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

We’re very familiar with the Pharisees constantly opposing Jesus. They were sometimes joined by the Herodians who were a political group. What they had in common was their fear that Jesus might cause political unrest and that the Romans would impose even more sanctions on their nation and so affect their position in society and frustrate their own personal ambitions.

So both groups wanted to get rid of Jesus and the question about paying taxes to Caesar, the Roman Emperor, was designed to trap him. If he said yes, it would turn the people against him because they hated their Roman oppressors. And if he said no, Jesus would be in trouble with the Romans who might very well accuse him of treason. Either way, they thought they had got him!

But Jesus always had an answer for them. He answers, as he so often did, by asking them a question. He asks for a coin and then asks them whose portrait is on it and whose inscription. They then reply, Caesar’s. So Jesus says, Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. In other words, The coin belongs to Caesar, then. So you'd better give it back to him! And don't forget to give to God what belongs to God. Brilliant!

But how does this apply to us as Christians? Let’s look at what Paul has to say in Romans 13:

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes…

This applies whether we like the government that has been elected or not. The exception to this is when the authorities want you to disobey God, who is of course a higher authority. As Peter and John said to the Jewish Sanhedrin who ordered them no longer to teach or preach in Jesus’ name:

Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard (Acts 4:19-20).

But now let’s turn to the next trap that was set for Jesus. This time it was by the Sadducees. Along with the Pharisees they formed the Jewish Sanhedrin (a council of national religious leaders). The Pharisees believed in life after death, spirits and angels (Acts 23:6-8). The Sadducees did not. So now let’s read Mark 12:18-27.

An Encounter with the Sadducees – Marriage after the Resurrection

18 Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19 "Teacher," they said, "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. 20 Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21 The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22 In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23 At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?"

24 Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25 When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26 Now about the dead rising – have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!"

From this passage I have selected three main areas from which we can learn:

Jesus’ opponents and our opponents
The basis of Christian certainty
Life after death.

1 Jesus’ opponents and our opponents

The first thing I'd like you to notice is that the questions Jesus’ opponents asked were not genuine. They didn’t believe in the resurrection (v18), but they ask him a question about it. There was no genuine desire to find out the truth. They just wanted to catch him out.

Jesus knew this, but he gave them an answer anyway. Sometimes we need to bear witness to the truth even when the questions people ask are not genuine.

Secondly, their questions were based on ignorance. The only authority they accepted was the Pentateuch and they couldn’t find resurrection in the Pentateuch, so they didn’t believe in it. But in v32 Jesus shows them it’s there in Exodus 3! The point Jesus is making is that at the time God revealed himself to Moses at the burning bush, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all long since dead. But God doesn’t say to Moses, I WAS the God of Abraham etc. He says I AM. Because Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were still alive, even after they had died.

The Sadducees hadn’t read the Pentateuch carefully enough. Very often, the questions people ask us are based on ignorance too. When they criticise the Bible, it’s not a bad idea to ask them, Have you read it? It’s important that we should know our Bible well, and know how to interpret it correctly. And one important principle of interpretation is that it’s Jesus’ interpretation of the Old Testament that matters.

Thirdly, we see that religious leaders can be in error. Notice what Jesus says in verses 24 and 27:

24 … "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 27 …You are badly mistaken!"

Their error sprang from the fact that they did not know the Scriptures well enough and had no real experience of the power of God. Sadly, this is true of many religious leaders today. We must not be led astray by them.

Finally, the opponents of Christ usually differ among themselves. The Pharisees now had an answer to the Sadducees but were more interested in defeating Jesus than in learning the truth. And it’s much the same with many people today. Nevertheless, we still have a responsibility to tell them the truth. But that brings us to the basis of our certainty as Christians.

2 The basis of Christian certainty

The Sadducees were in error because they did not know the Scriptures or the power of God. It follows, therefore, that if we want to know the truth we must understand both the Scriptures and the power of God. Both are important. As a Pentecostal minister, I am both an evangelical and a charismatic. I believe in the authority of the Bible and I believe that God’s miracle-working power is still available to us today. Some Christians believe in one without the other. But to neglect either is to miss God’s best for our lives.

God is all-powerful. So don’t limit your faith to what you can see. It’s the Scriptures that tell us what to believe. We can believe in life after death, resurrection, because God is all-powerful. We can say like Paul when on trial before King Agrippa:

Why should any of you consider it incredible that God raises the dead?

It’s a matter of simple logic. Our faith is not contrary to logic, but logic is not the main basis for our belief. We believe in resurrection because of what the Scriptures say. Look at how Peter quotes Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25ff. The resurrection was inevitable because of what God had said in the Old Testament. And in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Paul insists that Christ was raised from the dead according to the Scriptures.

In short, we believe in the power of God as revealed in the Scriptures. Like the noble Bereans in Acts 17:11, who examined the Scriptures every day to verify what they were hearing, we need to do the same. It is not enough to believe in the power of God. We must believe the Bible! Failure to do so will only lead to error. Supernatural manifestations must be tested to see if they are in line with Scripture. And the great certainty of our Christian faith is the evidence of the resurrection of Jesus as revealed in the Scriptures.

3 Life after death

So what does Jesus teach us in this passage about life after death? Four things:

i. He assures us that there is life after death (vv. 26-27).

He is not the God of the dead but of the living.

ii. We will be like the angels in heaven (v25)

This doesn’t mean that we will become angels when we get to Heaven. In Hebrews 12:22-24 angels are distinguished from the spirits of righteous people made perfect.

However, Jesus’ main purpose is to point out the fallacy in the Sadducees’ reasoning when they ask, Whose wife will she be? He is not saying that we will not recognise our loved ones when we get to Heaven. He is saying that relationships will be different.

iii. There is life after death now. We don’t have to wait until the resurrection.

Abraham is alive now (26). He lived some 2000 years before Jesus, but he was still alive when Jesus spoke about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:22 ff. And, as we saw at the transfiguration, Moses and Elijah were still alive at the time of Jesus. When we die as Christians we go to be with Christ which is far better (Philippians 1:23). To be absent from our body is to be present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8).

iv. Ultimately there is to be a resurrection

Jesus had already predicted his own death and resurrection on three different occasions. He got that right, so we can trust him about our resurrection! Look at what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:

But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

View Details

Talk 35 Mark 11:11-33 (continued) The Cursing of the Fig Tree

Welcome to Talk 35 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re continuing to look at Mark 11:11-33. As we said last time, there are two interrelated stories interwoven in this passage – the cursing of the fig tree and the so-called ‘cleansing’ of the temple. I suggested that Jesus’ actions were not really a cleansing (i.e. to make it fit for purpose), but rather an enacted parable declaring the beginning of the end of worship in the temple which was soon to be destroyed. It was to be replaced by a new temple, not one made with human hands, but a living temple made up of God’s people the church. If you have not already heard that talk, I encourage you to do so, as it is closely connected with this one.

Today we’ll be considering the significance of Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree and I’m going to suggest that this too was an enacted parable. So let’s begin by reading Mark 11, starting at verse 11.

Jesus entered Jerusalem and went to the temple. He looked around at everything, but since it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the Twelve. 12 The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13 Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. 14 Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.

Then we have the story of Jesus clearing out the temple, so now, jumping to verse 20:

20 In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!" 22 "Have faith in God," Jesus answered. 23 "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. 24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. 25 And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."

So what can we learn from this story? I’m going to deal with this under three headings:

· Lessons about Israel

· Lessons about Jesus

· Lessons about us.

The subject of Israel and its future is one over which Christians are often disagreed. I hesitate to deal with it because of the strong opinions held on the subject. But I’m going to address it,

(1) because I want to be faithful to the text of Scripture,

(2) because of what’s going on in Israel at the moment,

(3) because so many Christians are preoccupied with that.

Lessons about Israel

If I am right in saying that Jesus’ actions in clearing the temple were a kind of enacted parable declaring the end of temple worship, the question naturally arises, is the cursing of the fig tree also an enacted parable signifying God’s rejection of Israel? I’m going to give you three reasons why I think it is:

1 God himself likens Israel to a fig tree (Hosea 9:10)

When I found Israel, it was like finding grapes in the desert; when I saw your fathers, it was like seeing the early fruit on the fig tree (something exceptional and wonderful). But when they came to Baal Peor, they consecrated themselves to that shameful idol...

In Mark 11 Jesus is looking for early fruit on a fig tree but finding none. So he curses it. In Hosea, God is saying that at the beginning Israel had been a delight to him, something rare and precious, like grapes in the desert or like early fruit on a fig tree, but now they had forsaken him and had followed idols. (Compare v1 where he calls them Unfaithful).

2 Jesus’ parables clearly indicate God’s rejection of Israel

In Mark 12:1-12, (the very next chapter) Jesus tells the parable of the tenants. A man plants a vineyard and rents it to some farmers and then goes on a journey. At harvest time he sends a servant to get some fruit from the vineyard. The tenants seize him and send him away empty-handed. He sends other servants, but they are all badly treated. Eventually he sends his son, and they kill his son. As a result, Jesus says, the owner of the vineyard will kill the tenants and give the vineyard to others.

This reminds us of Isaiah 5:1-7, where God describes Israel as a vineyard he has planted which only produces bad fruit and so will be destroyed. All this strongly suggests that the cursing of the fig tree is a picture of Israel’s failure to please God by producing the fruit he is seeking. (Cf. also the parable of the fig tree in Luke 13:6-9).

3 The overall teaching of the New Testament.

Paul teaches that the true Jew is not a person physically descended from Abraham, but anyone, whether Jew or Gentile, who has believed as Abraham believed. Consequently, it is not the Jewish nation, the state of Israel, that are the people of God, but the company of those who believe, the church, the body of Christ, whose members are, as we saw last time:

…a spiritual house …a holy priesthood …a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God …who are now the people of God (1 Peter 2:5, 9-10).

But where does that leave the nation of Israel today? Doesn’t God still have a plan for Israel as a nation? Well, it all depends on how you interpret Romans, chapters 9-11. These chapters teach five things:

Not all Jews are God’s children (9:6-8, 10:16)

It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." 8 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring.

But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our message?" (10:16)

It’s only the believing remnant who are (9:27)

Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved.

Paul will say more about the remnant in chapter 11. But why aren’t all Jews God’s children?

Because, whether we be Jew or Gentile, salvation is by faith.

Salvation is by faith (10:30-32)

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works.

That’s why he says in 10:1 that

The Israelites need to be saved (10:1)

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved.

It’s not that they haven’t heard the message. In verse 19 Paul says:

Did they not hear? Of course they did

But sadly, Israel are a disobedient and obstinate people (21).

However, despite all this, Paul says that

God did not reject his people (11:1-2)

I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew…

But what does Paul mean by God’s people? (11:2-7)

From what follows in verses 2-7 it seems that’s he’s talking about what he calls a remnant.

Don't you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah – how he appealed to God against Israel: 3 "Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me"? 4 And what was God's answer to him? "I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal." 5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. 7 What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened…

(You may remember what Paul said in 9:27 – only the remnant will be saved.)

So, Paul begins by saying that God has not rejected his people (vv1-2). But who are his people? He refers to the story of Elijah where, despite the apostate condition of Israel as a whole, God had reserved for himself a remnant who had not bowed the knee to Baal. It’s the believing remnant that are the true Israel.

But what about the rest?

Paul says that those who have fallen are not beyond recovery (v11). He hopes that by his ministry he may save some of them (14). He compares Israel to an olive tree and some of the branches (the unbelieving Jews) have been broken off, so that the Gentiles, a wild olive, might be grafted in. But God is able to graft the Jews in again if they do not persist in unbelief (v23).

So, in the context, it is the Jews who believe who are God’s people. The true Israel was never, not even in the Old Testament, the entire state of Israel, but the remnant chosen by grace who have not bowed the knee to Baal (11:1-10).

So how does keep his promises to the Jewish nation?

By grafting them back into the olive tree (which now contains Gentile branches) if they come to faith in Christ. In doing so, they become part of the true and much larger Israel, the people of God from every tribe and tongue and nation, who have trusted Christ in whom alone is salvation.

So what does Paul mean when he says that All Israel shall be saved? (11:25-26)

25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.

In the light of all that Paul has said again and again about the true Israel not being the physical descendants of Abraham but those who believe as Abraham believed, he cannot possibly mean that all Jews will be saved simply because they are Jewish.

In my view, to be consistent with the clear teaching in the rest of the New Testament, God will fulfil his promises to Israel through the salvation of the believing remnant of the Jews along with the believing Gentiles who together comprise the true Israel.

However, I acknowledge that many Christians believe that at some point in the (maybe not too distant) future, when the full number of the Gentiles has come in, many of the Jews will come to faith in Christ, through whom alone is salvation. But even if that is correct, it does not mean that at present Jewish people, or the nation of Israel are God’s people. The true Israel is the company of all who believe, whether Jew or Gentile.

So ultimately, All Israel will be saved finds its fulfilment in the fact that all those who believe in Jesus, and only those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles, will find salvation in him. These chapters do not teach that the citizens of the modern state of Israel are God’s chosen people, and it’s wrong to talk of them as though they were.

But does this amount to antisemitism? Certainly not. Holding this view is no excuse for hatred of the Jews or for the terrible events of the holocaust. As Christians we are called to love the Jews, not because of the mistaken view that they are still God’s chosen people, but because they, like us, are sinners for whom Christ died. But we should not love them any more than we love the Africans, the Americans, the Australians, or the Arabs for that matter. God loves the world… and so should we.

So I encourage you to think on these things in the light of Scripture and not on the basis of preconceived ideas taught so dogmatically on some of the God channels.

Lessons about Jesus

His humanity

The first thing we notice in our passage is that Jesus was hungry (v12). This speaks to us of his humanity. As a man Jesus was subject to all the problems that we as humans face. He was God. He had created the universe. But he was hungry! In becoming one of us Jesus put himself in the position that he, the Creator, became dependent on his creation! What humility! What condescension!

And we find another aspect of his humanity in verse 13 where he went to find out if the fig tree had any fruit. Now it was early spring, at the time of the Passover. Mark tells us that he didn’t find any because it was not yet the season for figs. However, it was in leaf and the figs would soon be appearing. In fact, as we’ve already seen from Hosea 9:10, sometimes there would be early fruit on a fig tree. And no doubt that’s what Jesus was looking for. But he did not know if there would be any or not. He went to find out. Again, this speaks of the humanity of Jesus.

Although he was God – and God knows everything – when he came to earth he laid aside the use of his divine attributes. By limiting himself to a human body he could not possibly be omnipresent. Neither was he omniscient. He became as one of us. And yet he was still God! And our passage indicates that too.

His deity

Yes, we see his deity as well as his humanity in this passage. This is revealed, not as you might expect, in the fact that he was able to wither the fig tree, but in his reason for doing so. Like Israel, it was failing to produce the fruit God was looking for. The miracle itself did not indicate his deity, because he tells his disciples in verse 23 that anyone who has faith can do the same. But Paul says in Colossians 1 that Christ is the ruler over all creation. All things were created by him and for him. The fig tree was created by Jesus and for Jesus, and if it wasn’t bearing fruit for its Creator, there was no point to its existence!

Lessons about us

A lesson on fruitbearing

Now, putting together what we’ve been saying so far, it follows that as the true Israel is the church, made up of all believing Jews and Gentiles, then God expects to find fruit in our lives too. This is a clear biblical principle. God expects the things he has created to fulfil the purpose for which he has created them.

This is what Jesus is teaching in the Parable of the Fig Tree, to which I referred earlier:

A man had a fig tree, planted in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it, but did not find any. So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, 'For three years now I've been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven't found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?' 'Sir,' the man replied, 'leave it alone for one more year, and I'll dig around it and fertilize it. If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.' (Luke 13:6-9).

And the same truth is illustrated in John 15 in the Parable of the Vine. The branches that don’t bear fruit he cuts off (v2). And the fruit he is looking for is the fruit of the Spirit, especially love. If we’re not bearing fruit for Jesus, there really is no point to our existence!

A lesson on faith

It’s interesting that the disciples didn’t notice that the fig tree had withered until the day after Jesus had cursed it. And we don’t know exactly when it withered. Obviously it was some time during that 24 hour period. Surely if it had happened immediately they would have noticed it.

In a way, it doesn’t matter, because once Jesus had spoken the word, the tree was dead. The leaves, the symptoms of life, may have taken 24 hours to wither. This may be true of the problems we face too – the symptoms don’t always vanish immediately. The proof of the power of Jesus’ words may not have been evident at first, but Jesus himself doesn’t even look to see if has withered. He has faith to believe that what he has said will come to pass, because he was always hearing what his Father had to say (John 5:19).

And he even says that we can do the same:

Have faith in God, he says, I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

Wow! What a promise! Is Jesus really saying that whatever you say will happen as long as you have faith and do not doubt? At first sight it certainly looks like it. But before we jump to that conclusion, we need to consider verse 25:

25 And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.

This seems to suggest that the promise about putting mountains in the sea is conditional on our right standing with God. If you’re not prepared to forgive people, you’re not in right standing with God. And if you’re not, you won’t have the faith that brings the answer to your prayers. If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me (Psalm 66:18). Consider what Jesus says in the parable of the vine in John 15. The condition of answered prayer is our abiding in him.

And in 1 John 3:21-22 we’re told:

If our hearts do not condemn us we have confidence before God and receive anything we ask, because we obey his commands and do what pleases him.

But, returning to the promise in our passage, we need also to ask if it has ever been literally fulfilled in 2000 years of church history. And if not, why not? Has no one had enough faith? Or could it just be that God who put the mountains where they are doesn’t want them put into the sea?

But if the promise has never been literally fulfilled, there are many testimonies of metaphorical mountains that he been put into the sea. And every time someone puts their trust in Christ as their saviour, the mountain of sin that separated them from God has been removed and buried in the deepest sea. So, a promise that has possibly never been fulfilled literally has been fulfilled millions of times spiritually. But that brings us to our final lesson:

A Lesson on God’s Love

We need to remember that all this took place a few days before Jesus died. He was about to face an enormous mountain – the mountain of our sins, of the sins of the whole world. He didn’t have to face it. One word from him and Mount Calvary would be destroyed. And he was about to face another tree – the cross on which he died. He could have destroyed that too. He could have withered it like the fig tree. But instead of cursing it he chose to embrace it, and in the words of Galatians 3:13, to redeem us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us.

And why did he do it? Because he loved us. And that’s why he has the right to expect to find fruit in our lives. Are we really living for the purpose he created us? I know I want to be. Do you?

View Details

Talk 34 Mark 11:11-33 The ‘cleansing’ of the Temple

Welcome to Talk 34 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. In this talk and the next we’ll be looking at Mark 11:11-33. This passage contains two stories – the cursing of the fig tree and what is often referred to as the ‘cleansing’ of the Temple (although I shall suggest that this is not the best description of what Jesus was doing). The fact that these stories are interwoven in the text and that they both happened within the same 24-hour period strongly suggests that they have a common theme.

As we shall see, it’s possible to see both these events as two enacted parables announcing the termination of the temple as a place of worship and God’s rejection of Israel because of his anger that they have rejected his Son, something which is backed up by the parable of the tenants which immediately follows in 12:1-12. Today we’ll concentrate on the temple. Next time we’ll consider why Jesus cursed the fig tree. But first, let’s outline the story.

Verses 11-14. Jesus curses a fig tree because of its lack of fruit.

Jesus and the apostles are staying in Bethany, possibly with Martha and Mary. On the way into Jerusalem Jesus is hungry and seeing a fig tree in leaf he goes to find out if there is any fruit on it. Finding nothing but leaves he says, May no one ever eat fruit from you again. And, jumping to verse 20, we see that the fig tree has withered from the roots. But first, we have verses 15-19.

Verses 15-19. Jesus cleanses the Temple.

When he reaches Jerusalem, Jesus goes into the temple and drives out the people who are buying and selling there. He overturns the tables of the money changers and won’t allow anyone to carry merchandise though the temple courts. He reminds them of what God has said in Isaiah 56:7 – My house will be a house of prayer for all nations – and, quoting Jeremiah 7:11, adds, But you have made it a den of robbers. This angers the Jewish religious leaders and they start to look for a way to kill him. In the evening Jesus returns to Bethany.

Verses 20-25. Jesus teaches a lesson on faith from the fig tree which has withered.

The next day, as they’re going back into Jerusalem Peter points out that the fig tree Jesus cursed is withered. Jesus replies:

Have faith in God, I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore, I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.

We’ll be looking at this in more detail next time, so now verses 27-33.

Verses 27-33. Jesus is challenged by the Jewish leaders.

They arrive back in Jerusalem and Jesus is confronted by the Jewish religious leaders who challenge him over what he has just done in the temple. By what authority had he done it? Jesus avoids answering their question but counters with another one. Was John’s baptism of divine or of human origin? Realising that whatever answer they gave could lead them into criticism, they say, We don’t know. So Jesus replies, Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.

So, having now outlined the passage, let’s begin by considering the significance of Jesus’ actions in the temple.

The significance of Jesus’ actions in the temple

To understand this fully we need to look back into the Old Testament. If you know your Bible well, you will know that there were in fact three temples built in Jerusalem:

· Solomon’s Temple, which was Israel’s first temple

· Zerubbabel’s Temple, built to replace Solomon’s Temple after its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar

· Herod’s Temple, the temple at the time of Jesus.

However, the purpose for which the original temple was built remained the same, and we can learn much about this from Solomon’s prayer of dedication in 1 Kings 8:12-61.

A place for God to dwell for ever (v13)

Although Solomon’s purpose was for the temple to be a place for God to dwell in, he knew that God couldn’t be contained in a building, however magnificent it might be. Note what he says in verse 27:

The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!

And in verse 30 he recognises that heaven is God’s dwelling place:

Hear the supplication of your servant and of your people Israel when they pray toward this place. Hear from heaven, your dwelling place, and when you hear, forgive (cf. vv. 39,43, 45).

But what perhaps Solomon didn’t understand was that God’s ultimate plans were not for a physical temple made by men (Acts 7:48), but for a spiritual temple comprised of God’s people themselves (1 Corinthians 3:16, 2 Corinthians 6:16, Ephesians 2:21-22, 1 Peter 2:4-10). More on this later.

A place for the Name of the Lord (vv. 17,18, 19, 20, 29,43,48)

What does Solomon mean when he talks about building a temple for the Name of the Lord? In Bible times a name was not just a label, but something intended to represent the true nature of the person holding that name. The Name of the Lord has been defined as God himself, actively present, in the fulness of his revealed character.

And in the Psalms his name is linked with his righteousness, faithfulness, salvation, holiness, goodness, mercy, love, truth, and glory. If the temple was to be a place for God to dwell in, a place for the Name of the Lord, it must be a place that stood for and demonstrated all these divine qualities.

A place of prayer for all the peoples of the earth (vv. 28, 29, 30, 33, 38, 41-44, 48, 49)

From the number of references to prayer in 1 Kings 8 it’s clear that prayer was to be its primary purpose. Indeed, God himself was to say later through the prophet Isaiah:

My house will be a house of prayer for all nations (Isaiah 56:7).

Note that it was not only to be a house of prayer, but a house of prayer for all nations. This aspect of Solomon’s purpose in building the original temple is expressed in his prayer that God would even answer the prayers of foreigners and do whatever they ask of him so that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your own people Israel… (vv41-43) and may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other (v. 60).

So Solomon’s purposes in building the temple were that it should be:

A place for God to dwell in for ever

A place for the Name of the Lord

A place of prayer for all nations – a place where people might come to know the Lord.

But it’s clear from Jesus’ actions that these purposes were being frustrated by the Jewish people. Foreigners were treated with contempt and fleeced by the money changers. The qualities associated with the Name of the Lord were entirely absent. It was certainly not a fit dwelling place for God. And Jesus was right to be angry. Anger is not sin. It’s right to be angry about sin.

But were these the only reasons for his actions? Was he really cleansing the temple? Or was he perhaps declaring by his actions that the time for the temple was about to come to an end? In Mark 13:2 he certainly predicted its destruction, something which was literally fulfilled in AD 70. Could this have been the significance of his cursing the fig tree? We’ll come to that next time, but today let’s consider how God’s plans for the temple relate to Jesus himself, and then to his church.

Jesus as God’s temple

As we bear in mind God’s original purposes for his temple, we see that these are wonderfully fulfilled in Jesus himself. If the characteristics of the divine nature were not being displayed in the temple as they should, they most certainly were in Jesus, in whom dwelt all the fulness of deity in bodily form (Colossians 2:10). Jesus embodied all that the Name of Yahweh stood for. He was God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16 KJV). Jesus himself was the true temple. If that sounds strange, bear in mind that in Matthew 12:6, referring to himself, Jesus said, In this place is one greater than the temple. He also referred to his own body as the temple (John 2:19-21).

All the purposes of the temple were fulfilled in the coming of Jesus. With his death, about to take place in less than a week, the temple was to become redundant, its veil torn in two from the top to the bottom. The middle wall, the barrier that separated the Gentiles from the Jews was destroyed (Ephesians 2:14). We need no longer look to the temple for the answer to our prayers. It’s not in the temple, but in Jesus that we have the answer. Because of his sacrificial death on the cross, all who believe, both Jew and Gentile, have access to God through Jesus.

The church as God’s temple

Despite Solomon’s prayer that the temple he had built would be God’s dwelling place for ever, God himself never intended the temple in the Old Testament to be permanent. It was a prophetic symbol of Christ himself and of his church. Listen to what Paul says to the Corinthians. Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? (1 Corinthians 3:16).

And he tells the Ephesians that all who believe in him, whether Jew or Gentile, are:

Members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit (Ephesians 2:19-22).

And 1 Peter 2:4-10 describes Jesus as the living stone, rejected by men, but precious to him, and tells us that we too, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood. We are his chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation… we are now the people of God.

And 2 Corinthians 6:16

What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."

What a privilege. We are the temple. But privilege always carries with it responsibility. We need to learn lessons from the mistakes God’s people made of old. But let me first remind you of what we have said so far. I have suggested that, rather than cleansing the temple (i.e. making it fit for purpose), Jesus was actually expressing his anger at the way the temple had been defiled by the people of his day and that by his action in driving them out he was declaring an end to the temple which was shortly to be destroyed. It was no longer fit for purpose. It was no longer the dwelling place of God, no longer a place that represented all that his Father stood for, no longer a house of prayer for all nations where all the people of the world might come to know the Lord.

I have suggested that during his time here on earth the Lord Jesus himself was the true temple, the dwelling place of God, one who did represent and manifest all that the Father stood for, and that since his departure to heaven it is his purpose that the church, which is his body should fulfil the same role. The question is, are we? Or is it possible that we too are defiling God’s temple?

Are we defiling God’s temple, the church?

Let’s be clear. We’re not talking about a church building. We’re talking about the company of God’s people, the church. Each of us needs to examine our heart on this matter, but it might help to call to mind some of the areas where some of the early Christians sometimes failed:

· Thinking of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5), are there times when we are not always strictly honest with each other?

· Thinking of the Corinthians, are we defiling the temple by our divisions, especially over church leaders?

· Are we sometimes guilty of failing to put the needs of others before our own as the Corinthians were at the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11)?

· Is there sexual immorality among us as there was with them (1 Corinthians 6)?

· Are there idols in our lives (2 Corinthians 6:16)?

If we really want our gatherings to be times where

· we experience God’s holy presence

· where the Name of the Lord and all that he stands for is honoured and exemplified

· where we can expect our prayers to be answered

· and where people of all nations may come to know the Lord

let’s examine our hearts and put right anything that might hinder the church from being the temple God intends it to be. In both Old and New Testaments there were serious consequences for defiling the Lord’s temple. But, thank God, if we confess our sin, he is faithful and just, to forgive us our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we really want it, our church can be just what God wants it to be. May it be so, for the sake of his Name.

View Details

Talk 33 Mark 11:1-10 The Triumphal Entry

Welcome to Talk 33 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at what is often referred to as Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem. This is found not only in Mark 11:1-10, but also in Matthew 21:1-11, Luke 19:28-44, and John 12:12-19. We will be concentrating on Mark’s account, but we’ll also refer to the other accounts where they enrich our understanding of this wonderful event in the life of Jesus. But first, let’s read Mark 11:1-10.

1 As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two of his disciples, 2 saying to them, "Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 3 If anyone asks you, 'Why are you doing this?' tell him, 'The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.'" 4 They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it, 5 some people standing there asked, "What are you doing, untying that colt?" 6 They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go. 7 When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it. 8 Many people spread their cloaks on the road, while others spread branches they had cut in the fields. 9 Those who went ahead and those who followed shouted, "Hosanna!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" 10 "Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David!" "Hosanna in the highest!"

Today we’re going to look at six things this passage teaches us about Jesus, but first let’s set the scene in the overall context of Jesus’ life and ministry. Jesus had spent three and a half years teaching his disciples, meeting the needs of the people, forgiving sinners, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, driving out demons, giving sight to the blind, cleansing the lepers, and raising the dead. He is now on his way to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover with his disciples and where within less than a week he will be crucified.

The Passover was the annual festival celebrated by the Jews in memory of their ancestors’ deliverance from slavery in Egypt. It was called the Passover because the angel of death sent by God as the final judgment on the Egyptians passed over the Israelites when he saw the blood of a lamb sprinkled on the doorposts of their houses. What Jesus was to do later that week was to become the final Passover Lamb whose blood was to be shed on the cross to save not only the Israelites but those of all nations who would trust in him as the atoning sacrifice for their sins.

Few, if any, in the crowd who were praising Jesus as the coming king would have understood this. It’s more likely that they were expecting him to use his miracle working power to overthrow the Romans, but God’s plan and purpose was far bigger than that. Jesus had not come to save Israel from the power of Rome, but the entire world from the power and consequences of sin. So Jesus comes, not as a military conqueror riding on a horse or in a chariot, but as the humble king of peace, riding on a young donkey as prophesied in Zechariah 9:9:

Rejoice greatly O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

So, having set the scene, let’s now see what the passage teaches us about Jesus. As we saw right at the beginning of Mark’s Gospel, Mark’s intention is to proclaim Jesus as the Christ (the Messiah), the Son of God. This has been clear throughout all he has taught us about Jesus so far, but nowhere is it clearer than in today’s passage. First, we see that

Jesus was a man with authority

He tells his disciples what to do, and they do it. Note the words of instruction in verses 1-3.

Jesus sent two of his disciples, saying to them, "Go to the village ahead of you… you will find a colt tied there … Untie it and bring it here. If anyone asks you, 'Why are you doing this?' tell him, 'The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.'"

Jesus expects unquestioning obedience from his disciples, and this includes the owner of the donkey – Tell him, The Lord needs it. In fact, with the exception of the Pharisees (Luke 19:39-40), everyone in the story accepts the authority of Jesus. Even the crowd of pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem for the Passover festival acknowledge that Jesus is the one who comes in the name of (with the authority of) the Lord (v9). They even proclaim him as the King of Israel (John 12:13).

And finally, it seems that even the young donkey seems to have accepted his authority. No one had ever ridden him (v2). He was an unbroken animal. But the lowly beast submits to the authority of his Maker and carries Jesus on his final journey into Jerusalem.

Jesus was a prophet

He was a man who received supernatural revelation and this gave him detailed foreknowledge of future events. Notice what he says in verse 2

Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here.

Now Jesus was on his way up from Jericho where he had healed blind Bartimaeus and the village where the donkey was was ahead of him. He had certainly not been there recently. He had travelled over 100 miles from Capernaum at the northern end of the Sea of Galilee. There is no suggestion that he had made a private arrangement with the owners. Yet he knew exactly where the donkey was – just at the entrance of the village. He knew it was tied there. He knew that no one had ever ridden it. He knew it would be available.

Of course, if you have a mind to, you can possibly think of a natural explanation of how Jesus knew all these things, but please bear in mind that Jesus frequently knew things by supernatural revelation. He knew that Peter would catch a fish and find a coin in its mouth, enough to pay the temple tax (Matthew 17:24-27). He knew that the woman of Samaria had had five husbands and that the man she was living with was not her husband (John 4:17-18). And in Mark 14:12-16 he knew that when he sent two of his disciples to go and prepare for the Passover meal, when they went into the city they would find a man carrying a waterpot.

And in Luke 19:41-44 when he finally reaches Jerusalem he weeps over it and predicts in detail the tragic events which were to take place there some forty years later in AD 70.

So the Gospels are very clear that Jesus often knew things supernaturally. But was this because he was God, or was it because as a man he received supernatural revelation through the Holy Spirit? In answering this question it’s important to stress that Jesus is and always was God, and God is omniscient. He knows everything. And Jesus did not cease to be God while he was here on earth. However, although he was God, it seems that as man he did not know everything. Returning to our passage, we see in verse 3 that, although he knows about the donkey, he says, If anyone asks you, 'Why are you doing this?' rather than Someone will ask you. And, as we’ll see in our next talk, there’s another illustration of this in verse 13 where we’re told that:

Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he (Jesus) went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs (v13).

So in my view, the flashes of supernatural revelation Jesus received while he was here on earth are best understood to result not from his deity, but from the revelation of the Spirit. If they do not in themselves prove his deity, they certainly show how close was his relationship with his Father in Heaven. They were supernatural gifts from the Holy Spirit, and if we keep filled with the Spirit, similar gifts may be ours too as, of course, the Holy Spirit determines (1 Corinthians 12:11). Remember how Peter knew that Ananias and Sapphira were lying (Acts 5)? Peter was not God, but he received revelation from God, the Holy Spirit. Jesus, even though he was God, was also man, and he received revelation in the same way. But that brings us to the next lesson about Jesus.

Jesus was the Messiah

Now if, as we have just been saying, Jesus received prophetic revelation through the leading and power of the Holy Spirit, the same is true of the miracles he performed. The miracles were the reason for the people’s joy on Palm Sunday:

When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen (Luke 19:37).

They were longing for the coming of their long-awaited Messiah, which in Hebrew means anointed one. You will remember, of course, that when he was preaching in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus had read these words from Isaiah 61:1-2:

The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour (Luke 4:18-19),

and had gone on to say, Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing (v21).

In saying this he was claiming to be none other than the anointed one (the Messiah), and he had gone on to prove it by preaching good news to the poor, proclaiming freedom for the prisoners, recovery of sight to the blind, and releasing the oppressed. So the people on Palm Sunday were praising God not only for all the miracles they had seen, but because those miracles might well indicate that at last the Messiah had come. So they acknowledge Jesus as the Son of David, (Matthew 21:9), the king who comes in the name of the Lord (Luke 19:38).

So Jesus was a man of authority. But he was more than that. He was a prophet. But he was more than that. He was the Messiah. So what does our passage teach about what should be our attitude towards him?

Jesus is worthy of our worship

Among the crowd around Jesus on that first Palm Sunday, there must have been surely a variety of opinions and attitudes. There were the twelve disciples who had already come to believe that Jesus was the Messiah. There were undoubtedly other followers who had either already formed the same opinion or who were at least on the point of doing so. There may also have been those who, caught up in the excitement and emotion of the moment joined in the celebration without really understanding what was happening. And there were of course those like the Pharisees who understood what Jesus was claiming to be and who wanted to kill him because of it.

So can we really say that they were all worshipping Jesus? Three things suggest to me that many certainly were. First, their actions indicate it. Some threw their cloaks and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road in front of Jesus (v8). Secondly, their words, taken from all four Gospels, imply it:

Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!

Peace in Heaven and glory in the highest!

Hosanna to the Son of David!

Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!

Hosanna in the highest!

Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David!

Blessed is the King of Israel!

And thirdly, the Pharisees seem to have interpreted it as worship. They said to Jesus:

Teacher, rebuke your disciples!

But Jesus replied,

I tell you, if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out (Luke 19:39-40).

So if this wasn’t worship, it certainly looked like it! And their worship was centred around three main things:

o What Jesus had done for them (working miracles)

o Who he was (the Son of David, the King who comes with the authority of the Lord)

o The coming Kingdom of God.

And these are just the reasons we should worship him too.

Jesus is worthy of our trust

But Jesus is not only worthy of our worship. He is worthy of our trust too. The two disciples he sent ahead to get the donkey had come to trust Jesus, even when what he asked them to do might have been questionable. But they had not always. Remember, for example, the feeding of the 5,000? Jesus says, You give them something to eat. But, they reason, that would take eight months of a man’s wages. Again and again, they had questioned his instructions, but by now they were learning to trust him. They obey his instructions and, of course, find things just as Jesus has said. They had learned to trust him, because they had discovered that Jesus knows best. And we can trust him too. He sees what we cannot see. He knows what we do not know. He has detailed knowledge of future events.

And, of course, we can trust him, not only because of his knowledge, but also because of his power. He is not only omniscient. He is omnipotent. He is no longer here on earth as man, exercising power as he was led by the Spirit. He is seated at God’s right hand. All authority has been given to him in Heaven and on earth. We can trust him because he has the power and authority to accomplish whatever he knows is best for us.

And we can trust him because he is good. An all-powerful God who was not good would not be someone to trust, but rather to fear. But our God is not a king who comes to terrorise his people. Like Jerusalem of old, we can rejoice greatly because our king comes to us gentle and riding on a donkey. The gentleness, the humility, the goodness and love of Jesus assure us that we can trust him. And finally…

Jesus is worthy of our obedience and sacrifice

We have already seen the trust and obedience of the two disciples Jesus sent to get the colt. But we also see the sacrifice of those who spread their cloaks on the road (v8). No thought of how dirty or how damaged they might get, not only from the hooves of the donkey but also from the feet of the crowd who were following Jesus. Their worship was expressed in an extravagant disregard for their worldly possessions. And they did not understand that Jesus was on the way to Jerusalem to suffer and die for the forgiveness of their sins. But we do. How much more extravagant should be our commitment to the Lord Jesus?

But now, one final thought. We have seen in this passage that Jesus was a man of authority, a man who received supernatural revelation of future events. We have seen that he was the Messiah, the Son of David, the king of Israel. And yet the story reveals that he needed something. He needed a donkey! Note those words in verse 3 – The Lord… needs it. The Lord, the Creator of the universe needed a donkey! It was to play a part in the fulfilment of God’s purposes. And, believe it or not, he needs you too. Of course, he could fulfil his purposes without us, but he has chosen not to. He has chosen to use donkeys like Peter and Andrew and James and John, like you and like me. Do you know who he is? How extravagantly will you worship him? How much will you trust him? To what extent will you obey him? Jesus is worthy of your sacrificial obedience. He won’t enforce it. But doesn’t his love demand it. Isaac Watts certainly thought so:

Were the whole realm of nature mine,

That were an off’ring far too small.

Love so amazing, so divine,

Demands my soul, my life, my all.

View Details

Talk 32 Mark 10:46-52 Blind Bartimaeus receives his sight

Welcome to Talk 32 in our series on Mark's Gospel. Today we are looking at Mark 10:46-52. It's the story of how a blind beggar called Bartimaeus receives his sight. It's a short passage so let's begin by reading it.

46 Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (that is, the Son of Timaeus), was sitting by the roadside begging. 47 When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 48 Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" 49 Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you." 50 Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus. 51 "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see." 52 "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

We'll begin by looking at what this passage has to tell us about Jesus. Then we'll consider what we can learn about Bartimaeus, and finally we'll see how this story may well have an application in our own lives. Firstly, then, what does the passage teach us about Jesus?

Jesus

The first thing we notice is that Jesus is accompanied not only by his disciples but by a large crowd. This clearly indicates his popularity. We know from what we have already seen in Mark's gospel, Jesus was opposed by the Pharisees and other religious leaders, but it's also clear that the common people heard him gladly. This was almost certainly because of the miracles of healing he was performing as well as the wonderful things he was teaching.

Secondly, we see indications that people were beginning to realise that Jesus was the Messiah. Notice that in verse 46 the passage makes a distinction between the disciples and the crowd. The disciples had left all to follow Jesus. Many in the crowd would have been following just because they hoped he might heal them, or that at least they might see some amazing miracle. The disciples on the other hand had begun to understand who Jesus was. For most of the crowd he was at best a prophet, known to them simply as Jesus of Nazareth. Some, however, like Bartimaeus we're beginning to wonder if he might be the promised Messiah. Notice that Bartimaeus refers to him by the messianic title, Son of David.

Thirdly, the recognition that Jesus was the Messiah sprang from the authority Jesus clearly possessed. We see this in verse 49 in the way Jesus gives clear instructions and is immediately obeyed – Call him. So they called him… They have just told Bartimaeus to be quiet, but at one word from Jesus they immediately change their tune. And, of course, Jesus’ authority is even more evident in his power to grant Bartimaeus his request – Go, your faith has healed you. And immediately Bartimaeus receives his sight.

And finally, our passage reveals the compassion of Jesus, not just in healing the blind man, but in the fact that he stopped (v49) to do so. Remember verses 33-35. He was on his way to Jerusalem to be crucified – probably in only a few days’ time. The very next thing Mark records is the triumphal entry into Jerusalem which happened less than a week before Jesus was crucified. But despite the knowledge of his imminent suffering and death, Jesus takes time to stop and to meet the need of a beggar. But what does the passage teach us about Bartimaeus?

Bartimaeus

The first thing we notice is his desperate need. He was blind and he was a beggar. In those days there was little else that the blind could do, other than beg. His needs were physical – he was blind. His needs were financial – he had to beg. But less obvious perhaps was his need for acceptance in the society in which he lived. It was commonly believed that blindness was caused by sin – either the sin of the blind man or of his parents. This is very clear in John 9:2 where, in connection with another blind man, the disciples asked Jesus:

Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?

Jesus was quick to correct this wrong assumption, but the fact that even his disciples made it is evidence of the view prevalent at the time. So, although it’s not mentioned here in Mark 10, it’s not unreasonable to assume that many of the people regarded Bartimaeus’ condition as the result of sin. However, as we shall see, it’s spiritual blindness that results from sin, not physical blindness.

So the first thing we learn about Bartimaeus is his desperation. Closely connected with this is his determination. Imagine the scene. He’s sitting at the roadside begging. He can see nothing, but he can hear. And he hears a commotion. There’s a crowd of people coming down the road. He wonders what the noise is all about. And then he hears that it is Jesus. Now he must have heard about Jesus and the miracles he had been performing. He had possibly heard about the blind man Jesus had healed in Mark 8, or the many blind people who had been healed in Luke 7:22. And now Jesus of Nazareth is passing his way. Faith is quickened in his heart and he’s determined to be healed. He cries out:

Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me.

The people rebuke him and tell him to be quiet. But this only makes him shout louder. And when Jesus calls him, he responds immediately. He jumps to his feet. He wants nothing to hinder him coming to Jesus, so he throws his cloak, possibly his most valued possession, aside, and he comes to Jesus. Why? Because he wants to see (v.51).

But why did he so earnestly want to see? Was it only to meet his physical and financial needs, or could it also be that he wanted to find the acceptance in society that we were talking about earlier? I find it interesting that many people today who were born with a disability have no real desire to be healed. They want to be accepted for who they are, just as they are. And rightly so. But while I understand and respect their position, and certainly have no intention to criticise, I sometimes wonder if one reason we see so few outstanding miracles of healing in such cases is that there is no real desire to be healed – but of course the reason could easily be a lack of faith on the part of those who pray for them. Thank God that in the case of Bartimaeus there was no lack of faith on the part of Jesus or of desire on the part of Bartimaeus.

But that brings us to the third thing the passage reveals about Bartimaeus – his faith in Jesus.

We know that Bartimaeus had faith because Jesus said in verse 52 that it was his faith that healed him. Yet we know that it was Jesus who healed him because he asked Bartimaeus, What do you want me to do for you? There is no contradiction here. Jesus healed Bartimaeus because Bartimaeus had faith in him. Faith alone is not enough. What matters is who you have faith in. The evidence of Bartimaeus’ faith in Jesus is that he called out to him, he came to him immediately Jesus called him, he took Jesus at his word when he said, What do you want me to do for you?, and he believed that Jesus could heal him – Rabbi, I want to see.

But where did that faith come from? The key is undoubtedly in that little word heard in verse 47. Romans 10:17 tells us that

Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ.

Of course, we’re not told how Bartimaeus came to hear about Christ, but as we’ve already suggested, he must surely have already heard what Jesus had been doing for others. And had he heard what Jesus had said in the synagogue at Nazareth when he read from the scroll of the prophet Isaiah quoting the words he has anointed me to… proclaim recovery of sight to the blind? (Luke 4:18). We don’t know, but somehow Bartimaeus had come to understand that Jesus was indeed the Son of David, the Messiah. His faith sprang from a recognition of who Jesus is and an acknowledgment that what Jesus had done for others, he could also do for him.

And as a result he immediately received his sight and became a follower of Jesus. The NIV translation of verse 52 doesn’t quite do justice to the text. Translated literally it says he followed Jesus in the way. Admittedly this could mean just what the NIV says, along the road. But by the time Mark wrote his Gospel, Christians were becoming known as followers of the Way (cf. Acts 9:2; 18:25; 19:9) and he may well have intended us to understand that Bartimaeus became a Christian. At all events, he became a follower of Jesus. His faith had not only healed him. It had also saved him. But that brings me to the significance of what Jesus says in verse 52 – Your faith has healed you.

The Greek word used for healed here can also be translated saved. Sozo is used in a variety of ways in the New Testament. It can refer to the salvation of the soul, or to the healing of the body, or to deliverance from danger, for example. Exactly the same Greek wording is used when:

· Jesus heals a woman with bleeding (Matt. 9:22, Mark 5:34, Luke 8:48)

· He cleanses the grateful leper (Luke 17:19)

· He saves a sinful woman (Luke 7:50).

Of course, only the context can tell you whether sozo should be translated heal or save etc. But sometimes it can mean both, and here in our passage the context suggests that Bartimaeus’ faith had not only healed him, but saved him too. He followed Jesus in the way. He didn’t just go away and do his own thing, as so many seem to after receiving a touch of healing from the Lord. The only right response when God has wonderfully met our needs is to do what Bartimaeus did, to follow him in the pathway of his will for our lives.

How does all this apply to us?

The lessons we learn from the story of Bartimaeus apply to all of us, whatever our needs may be. So let’s summarise what those lessons are:

Bartimaeus had a desperate need for which there was no human solution.
He recognised his need and wanted to find a solution.
When he heard about Jesus he did not delay in asking him to have mercy on him.
He would not let anything or anyone deter him from coming to Jesus.
He took Jesus at his word believing that he could do whatever he asked him.
So he was specific in his request.
When it was granted, he became a follower of Jesus.

If you’re already a follower of Jesus, you have already recognised who Jesus is. If you have a desperate need you need to recognise that. Don’t pretend you haven’t got it. It may be that you need to honestly ask yourself if you really want to be free from it. You need to let nothing hinder you from coming to Jesus and asking him to meet it. Don’t let other people put you off. Be determined. Let no one and nothing deter you. Don’t put off the decision. Come to Jesus immediately and be specific in your request. Tell him what you want him to do for you.

Jesus is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. If he could meet Bartimaeus’s need, he can meet yours too. You have already trusted him for your salvation. Trust him for this too. He may well surprise you with an immediate answer. And if the answer is not immediate, remember that Jesus loves you and he will do what is best for you. If he says to you, as he said to Paul, My grace is sufficient for you (2 Corinthians 12:7-10), you need to trust him that he knows what is ultimately best for you. Sometimes our prayers are answered immediately. Sometimes they’re answered gradually. And sometimes they’re answered later. The important thing is to keep on believing and to keep on following Jesus in the way.

However, there is one prayer that God will always answer immediately. Bartimaeus prayed, Jesus… have mercy on me. Mercy is more than pity. Pity is feeling sorry for someone. Mercy means much more than that. When we ask God to have mercy on us we are asking him to grant us something that we don’t deserve. This applies first and foremost to the forgiveness of our sins. You may not be physically blind, like Bartimaeus, but if you have not yet come to Jesus and asked him to forgive your sins, you have a more desperate need than physical blindness. But Jesus can open your eyes to the truth. Do you want to see? The lessons we learnt from Bartimaeus apply to you too. If you recognise your need and realise that only Jesus can meet it, all you need to do is ask him to save you. Resist the temptation to delay. Reject the attempts of others to dissuade you. Rely completely on Jesus – take him at his word, and you will receive your sight. And when you do, become a real follower of Jesus.

View Details

Talk 31 Mark 10:32-45 Jesus teaches the way of sacrificial service

Welcome to Talk 31 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today our passage is Mark 10:32-45 where Jesus again predicts his death and resurrection, deals with a request from James and John that they might sit next to him in the coming kingdom, and teaches us that the way to true greatness is sacrificial service. The passage is also a healthy reminder about how we should pray, and has much to say that’s relevant to church leadership today. We’ll begin by reading verses 32-34:

32 They were on their way up to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way, and the disciples were astonished, while those who followed were afraid. Again he took the Twelve aside and told them what was going to happen to him. 33 "We are going up to Jerusalem," he said, "and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, 34 who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise."

The NIV translation of verse 32 seems to suggest a distinction between the disciples and those who followed. However, although there may well have been people following who were not among the disciples, the word disciples is not in the Greek text and Mark almost certainly intends us to understand that all those who were following Jesus were both astonished and afraid. They may well have been astonished by what Jesus had said in verse 31 – Many who are first will be last, and the last, first. And his mention of persecutions in verse 30 could easily account for them being afraid.

And what Jesus says next could hardly have made them feel any better! He tells them what is going to happen to him, and this time in more detail. In Mark 8:31 we read that

he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again (Compare Mark 9:31).

But now he tells them he will be betrayed… condemned him to death… handed over to the Gentiles, who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. This information was both astonishing and terrifying, and it seems unlikely that they had any clear idea about what he meant by saying that three days later he would rise. Of course, it’s easy for us, with the benefit of hindsight, to know what he meant, and of course so did the disciples after he had showed himself to be alive by many convincing proofs over a period of six weeks (Acts 1:3). But they clearly did not understand it in advance. Even as late as resurrection morning, John 20:9 tells us that they still did not understand that Jesus had to rise from the dead.

But Jesus himself knew what he was saying. He knew that he would be betrayed. He knew they would condemn him to death. He knew they would mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. But he went up to Jerusalem anyway because he knew that he must give his life as a ransom for us (v45). For you, for me, and for people like James and John whose self-seeking attitude we read about next:

35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask." 36 "What do you want me to do for you?" he asked. 37 They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory." 38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" 39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40 but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."

The main purpose of these verses, and those that follow, seems to be to teach us the importance of having a servant heart and not to seek great things for ourselves, but they also teach us some important principles about our attitude when we come to God in prayer. James and John want Jesus to do for them whatever they ask him. This certainly revealed some faith. They believed that Jesus could do whatever they asked. And according to Matthew 20:20-28, along with their mother, they also believed in his coming kingdom. And didn’t Jesus say elsewhere that If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer (Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24)? So what was wrong with James’ and John’s request to sit beside Jesus in his coming kingdom?

Three things. Firstly, their motive was wrong. It was selfish. They were seeking personal greatness. In the letter that James the Lord’s brother wrote to first century Jewish Christians he stresses the importance of having faith when we pray (James 1:6-7), but he also warns of the possibility of not receiving what we ask for if we ask with wrong motives (James 4:3).

Secondly, they didn’t get what they asked for because they didn’t know what they were asking (v38). Promises like the one we have already referred to in Matthew 21:22 must be balanced with what John was later to write in 1 John 5:14, when he says:

This is the confidence we have in approaching God; that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us.

I wonder if, when he wrote this, John had in mind Jesus’ refusal to grant his request in today’s passage. The truth is that, unless we have received a clear revelation from God in a certain matter, we too do not know what we are asking. We never fully understand the implications of what we ask for in prayer. Our requests should always be made in faith, but also in an attitude of submission to God’s will.

And thirdly, closely connected to the last point, they did not understand that even Jesus could not grant their request without reference to his Father. In verse 40 he says your request is not for me to grant. In John 5:19 he said:

The Son can do nothing by himself. He can do only what he sees the Father doing…

Everything Jesus said and did was in dependence on what he saw the Father doing. Each of the members of the Trinity works in complete harmony with the others and does not work independently. And while he was here on earth Jesus as a man did not know everything. He did not know the day or the hour of his second coming. Only the Father knew that (Mark 13:32).

So these verses teach us much about how we should bring our requests to God. Our motives should be right. Our requests should be brought in submission to God’s will, recognising that we do not always know the significance of what we are asking, and if there were some requests that even Jesus did not have the authority to grant, they are certainly not for us to claim! God’s perfect will for us may be, as it was for James and John, a pathway of suffering (vv38-39).

But before we leave the subject of prayer, just one more thing. In verse 36 Jesus says, What do you want me to do for you? He actually asks the same question of blind Bartimaeus in verse 51. More of that next time, but just for now please notice that the question does not guarantee the answer we may be looking for. For Bartimaeus his request was granted. For James and John, theirs was not. Beware of preachers who tell you that Jesus is asking you, What do you want me to do for you? implying that whatever you ask you will get. Of course it's fine to tell Jesus what we’d like him to do, but we need to understand that, because he knows best, his answer could be No.

41 When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. 42 Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Quite understandably, when the other ten apostles heard about James’ and John’s request, they became indignant. Who do they think they are? I hear them saying. So Jesus calls all twelve of them together. It’s important to notice here that, although Jesus’ teaching in these verses would be of value in society as a whole, in the context what he says it’s addressed to the future leaders of the church. And he stresses that church leadership must be very different from the style of leadership we see in the world. So let’s look at what Jesus says here and then see how his teaching was reinforced by his own example and by the teaching of apostles like Peter and Paul in the New Testament.

Firstly, then, Jesus himself. In these verses he teaches that true greatness is expressed in a willingness to serve, to become a slave for the sake of others (vv. 43-44). Even the Son of Man, the Messiah, did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life a ransom for many (v.45). This reminds us immediately of two passages of Scripture, John 13 and Philippians 2. In John 13 Jesus literally fulfils the role of a servant and washes his disciples’ feet, and after he has done so he says:

12 …Do you understand what I have done for you? 13 You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. 14 Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. 15 I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 16 I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger (Greek, an apostle) greater than the one who sent him. 17 Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them (John 13:12-17).

We hear a lot about apostles in the church today, and I truly believe that this ministry is essential for the church in every generation – see Body Builders, Chapter 2 – but the signs of a true apostle must surely include a willingness to take the role of a lowly servant. That’s what Jesus did, for, as we read in Philippians 2:

…being in very nature God, (he) did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross!

9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:6-11).

And, as we have seen, Jesus told the apostles that they should follow his example. But it doesn’t just apply to apostles. Listen to what Peter says:

To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder, a witness of Christ's sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2 Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers – not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; 3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. 4 And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away (1 Peter 1:1-4).

Here in verse 3 Peter is reflecting the words of Jesus in today’s passage when he talks about the rulers of the Gentiles lording it over those who are under their authority, and says Not so among you. Peter is referring to every aspect of leadership in the church. He refers to the elders as shepherds (or pastors), and as overseers (or supervisors or bishops). Now is not the time to discuss the significance of each of these terms – for more, please see Body Builders, Chapter 5, where I deal with the matter in more detail – but what is abundantly clear is that, whatever the role of leadership, what’s required is a servant heart.

This does not mean that church leaders should not be honoured and respected. They certainly should. But it’s not for them to seek that honour or respect. Respect must be earned, not demanded. While I welcome the renewed emphasis on the importance of apostles in recent decades, it’s a sad fact that in some quarters, abuses have occurred to the detriment of all concerned.

There is a desperate need for a biblically balanced understanding of the subject. So let’s finish with a brief look at two words that are frequently used in the New Testament to describe what church leaders should be – diakonos and doulos.

Diakonos is the word used in today’s passage where Jesus says in verse 43, Whoever wants to become great among you must be you servant. See also Matthew 20:26 and Mark 9:35 where it’s used in the same way. Its basic meaning is a waiter or someone who runs errands. It’s used in this way in John 2 to describe the servants at the wedding feast in Cana and in Acts 6 we have the related word diakonia to describe the ministry of those who were to wait on tables and supervise the distribution of food to the poor. It may be that this was the role of those who are described as deacons in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8-12.

But it’s also used more widely to refer to anyone who serves the church in whatever capacity. There are too many examples in the New Testament to mention them all, but it’s noteworthy that in 1 Corinthians 3:5 Paul refers to himself and Apollos as Only servants through whom you came to believe – as the Lord assigned to each his task.

But in fact he often uses a far stronger word than diakonos to describe his ministry. He uses doulos which means slave – a word also used by Jesus in Mark 10:44. It’s the very first word Paul uses to describe himself in his letter to the Romans – Paul, a slave of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle. Yes, he’s an apostle, but first he is a slave. Compare also Galatians 1:10, Philippians 1:1 and Titus 1:1. In these verses he’s a slave of Christ, but in 2 Corinthians 4:5 he goes even further and says:

For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves your slaves for Jesus’ sake.

He is not only a slave of Jesus Christ, he’s the Corinthians’ slave too! His apostolic authority came from none other than the Lord Jesus, but his right to exercise that authority was his willingness to serve not only Jesus, but those to whom he was called to preach.

And finally, it’s worth mentioning that it was not only Paul who saw his ministry in this light. That’s how James saw himself too (James 1:1), and Peter (2 Peter 1:1), and Jude (Jude 1:1), and John (Revelation 1:1). It seems that they had all learnt the lesson taught and exemplified by Jesus:

Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all (Mark 10:43-44).

My prayer is that we may learn it too.

View Details

Talk 30 Mark 10:13-31 The Kingdom of God

Welcome to Talk 30 in our series on Mark's gospel. Today we're looking at chapter 10 verses 13-31 where we read of how Jesus blessed the little children, and about a rich young ruler – Mark calls him a man. Matthew tells us that he was young. Luke tells us that he was a ruler – who asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life. We’ll work through the passage reading each section as we come to it, so we’ll begin with verses 13-16.

People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14 When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15 I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." 16 And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

v.13 People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them.

Mark has already shown us how powerful the touch of Jesus could be. It could bring healing to the deaf and mute, cleansing to the leper, and sight to the blind. We’re not told why the people wanted Jesus to touch these children. It could be that they too were suffering from some such affliction, or it could simply be that they wanted Jesus’ blessing on their lives. Matthew also tells us that they wanted Jesus to pray for them, but we’re not told what for.

Neither are we told why the disciples rebuked them. Perhaps, like many people in those days, they considered children unimportant. If so, that would account for Jesus’ indignant response in the following verses.

14 When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15 I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." 16 And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

These verses teach us first and foremost about the importance of little children or babies (Luke 18:18). We are to do nothing that would hinder them in coming to Jesus, or to put it more positively, we are to do everything we can to help them come to him. Perhaps we should be asking ourselves if there is anything more we could do to reach children for Jesus.

But we also see in these verses important truths about the kingdom of God. There are no less than five references to the kingdom of God in today’s passage, two in the verses we have just read and three in verses 23-25 where Jesus stresses how hard it is for the rich to enter it. We’ll turn to the story of the rich young ruler in just a moment, but first let’s compare what Jesus says in verse 15 with what he says in verse 25. In verse 15 he says:

I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.

and in verse 25 he says:

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

There’s nothing wrong with being rich, but the problem can be that people who are rich can easily become self-reliant. Instead of depending on God, they can come to depend upon their wealth. How different is that from little children, who are totally dependent on their parents. So Jesus is saying that the only way to enter the kingdom of God is with childlike trust and total dependence on God our heavenly Father. But what does he mean by entering the kingdom of God? That will become apparent as we now turn to verses 17-22:

17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 18 "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good – except God alone. 19 You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honour your father and mother.'" 20 "Teacher," he declared, "all these I have kept since I was a boy." 21 Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." 22 At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

There are quite a few things we can admire about this young man’s attitude. He’s enthusiastic. He’s respectful to Jesus. He asks a very important question. But what he says reveals a deep misunderstanding. This becomes clear as we read Jesus’ answer.

18 "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good – except God alone.

Jesus is implying two things here. First, since only God is good, to call Jesus good is to acknowledge his deity, something which Jesus does not deny. And secondly, he is saying that no-one is good enough to inherit eternal life. There’s nothing you can do to achieve it. You can only enter the kingdom of God by total dependence on him and childlike trust in his love. But since the young man thinks he can achieve eternal life by doing good, Jesus says:

19 You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honour your father and mother.'"

To which the young man replies:

Teacher, all these I have kept since I was a boy (20).

We wonder if the young man was hoping that this would be enough, but Jesus makes clear that it is not. He loves this young man, but love does not hide the truth. He says:

21 One thing you lack. Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.

Preaching the gospel involves pointing out that people have a need and then showing them how that need can be met. What was the one thing this young man lacked? Not the selling of everything he had, but the childlike dependence on God that would enable him to do so.

And so we read that

22 He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

The wealth of this world deprived him of the treasure in heaven that Jesus so wanted him to have.

And finally, before we move on to verses 23-27, please notice that throughout this passage entering the kingdom of God refers to having eternal life in heaven. The rich young ruler asks what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus shows him the way to have treasure in heaven and comments to his disciples that it hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. But that brings us to verses 23-27:

23 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!" 24 The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." 26 The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, "Who then can be saved?" 27 Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God."

23 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!"

As we’ve already explained, there’s nothing wrong with being in rich – most listeners to this podcast will be richer than 98% of the rest of the world’s population – the problem arises when we put our trust in riches. God does not expect every Christian to sell all they have and give to the poor – though the early Christians in Acts certainly did so (Acts 2:45, 4:32) – but he does expect us to be willing to do so. Following Jesus means total commitment. We cannot serve God and money (Matthew 6:24).

24 The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

The disciples are amazed, but Jesus reemphasises what he is saying by using an extreme illustration. Various suggestions have been made about what he meant by a camel going through the eye of a needle. For example, in koine Greek the word for camel (kamelos) is almost identical to the word for rope (kamilos), so it’s suggested that Jesus was actually referring to a piece of rope, which it is argued makes more sense. But Jesus’ purpose is not to make sense. He is using hyperbole, extreme exaggeration to make his point. Remember how, when talking about not judging others, he uses the word plank to contrast with speck in Matthew 7:3-5. And the same goes for the idea that the ‘eye of a needle’ was a reference to a small gate in the wall of Jerusalem through which camels found it difficult to pass. Both these suggestions water down the extreme emphasis Jesus is placing on what he is saying.

26 The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, "Who then can be saved?" 27 Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God."

The disciples’ question is quite understandable. If entering the kingdom of God is as hard as Jesus is saying, how can anyone be saved? And now Jesus goes even further. Salvation, entry into the kingdom of God, is not just hard, it’s impossible! At least, it’s impossible with man, but it’s not impossible with God. We saw earlier how, in calling Jesus good, the rich young ruler, without realising it, was actually implying that Jesus was God. Salvation would have been impossible for us, if it were not made possible by Jesus, who, because he was good enough to pay the price of sin, was able to unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in.

So far, we have seen that entering the Kingdom of God means being saved, receiving eternal life, and having treasure in Heaven. Jesus talks about the Kingdom of God belonging to little children (v14), and about it being received (v15). But the thing he mentions most is entering it. Putting all these things together we see that to enter the kingdom of God means to be saved, to receive eternal life, to know that you are going to Heaven, because the kingdom of God belongs to you because you have received it as a little child. And this is something that is only possible because of Jesus. But in the final few verses of our passage we see the rewards that Jesus gives to those who follow him.

28 Peter said to him, "We have left everything to follow you!" 29 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30 will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields – and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. 31 But many who are first will be last, and the last first."

28 Peter said to him, "We have left everything to follow you!"

Peter and his fellow fishermen had not given up as much as the rich young ruler was asked to give up. But they had left their means of livelihood and followed Jesus the moment he called them (Mark 1:16-19). It was not the forsaking of these things that earned them their salvation, for, as we have seen, salvation cannot be earned. What saved them was the childlike trust in Jesus that enabled them to do so. Nevertheless, there are abundant rewards for doing so, and this applies to all.

29-30 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields – and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life.

The ultimate reward is eternal life in the age to come, but salvation brings its blessings down here. The blessings of the future kingdom are in some measure available now. Throughout the New Testament there is an eschatological tension between the present and future aspects of the kingdom of God. It’s already, but not yet! But that’s a subject for another time.

There are abundant blessings in this present age, even if at times they come for some with persecution. I am reminded of what the writer to the Hebrews says talking of the heroes of faith:

Others were tortured, and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection (Hebrews 11:37).

In Heaven there are rewards for suffering for Christ and there are rewards for service, but our passage ends with the serious reminder that we may be surprised when we get to Heaven. Jesus says:

31 But many who are first will be last, and the last first.

The standards of God’s kingdom are not the standards of the world. It’s the meek who will inherit the earth. It’s those who humble themselves as a little child who will be the greatest in the kingdom of God (Matthew 18:4).

I'm so glad Jesus has made it possible for me to go to heaven. And I'm glad for the opportunities to serve him I've had down here. What little I have given up for him is nothing compared with the abundant blessings he continues to shower upon me. It's by his grace that we are saved. It's by his grace that we are privileged to serve him, and whatever blessings may be stored up for us in the age to come will only be ours because of that amazing grace. Lord, please help us to continue to trust you like a little child and to learn to live in total dependence upon you. Amen.

View Details

Talk 29 Mark 10:1-12 Jesus answers questions on divorce

Welcome to Talk 29 in our series on Mark’s gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 10:1-12 where Jesus answers questions on divorce, and in so doing teaches us key principles about the nature and sanctity of marriage. Of course, in a talk of this length, it won’t be possible to go into the subject in great detail or to refer to the wide variety of opinions that are held on the matter. But in my view, there are some things that stand out very clearly from what Jesus has to say, and it’s those things that we’ll be concentrating on today. So let’s begin by reading Mark 10:1-12.

Jesus then left that place and went into the region of Judea and across the Jordan. Again crowds of people came to him, and as was his custom, he taught them. 2 Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3 "What did Moses command you?" he replied. 4 They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away." 5 "It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 7 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." 10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11 He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

So far Jesus’ ministry has centred largely on the region of Galilee, but now, and for the rest of Mark’s Gospel, it has transferred to the region of Judea where the people were very different from those in Galilee. But whatever the region, some things never change. Jesus continues to teach. Crowds come to listen. And the Pharisees are determined to catch Jesus out by asking him trick questions. And it’s in that context that we need to understand his teaching on divorce in this passage.

We need to bear in mind that the Pharisees had seen on several occasions how Jesus was radically reinterpreting the Law of Moses. They were so annoyed about this that they were already trying the find ways to have Jesus killed. (Mark 3:6 tells us that they had begun to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus, because he had healed a man on the Sabbath day). John the Baptist had already been executed by Herod for speaking out against divorce and adultery (Mark 6:17-28). So it seems likely that the Pharisees’ purpose in testing Jesus in this way was to have him killed.

That’s why we mustn’t see Jesus’ reply to their question as a full-blown theology of marriage and divorce, but rather as a wise answer that avoided the trap the Pharisees had set for him. However, what Jesus does say reveals vitally important truths on the subject, as we shall see as we work through the passage. But before we start, just one more thing. Matthew’s account of the same incident (Matthew 19:1-12) includes a little more of Jesus’ reply than we find in Mark. For example, in verse 2 where the Pharisees ask Jesus, Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife? Matthew’s account includes the words for any and every reason.

And in verse 11 Matthew includes the words except for marital unfaithfulness. This, of course, does not mean that Matthew is contradicting Mark. He is simply including more of what Jesus actually said, and we’ll be taking this into account as we seek to understand what Jesus was saying. And in case you’re wondering why Matthew, Mark and Luke sometimes have slightly different accounts of the same incident, it’s probably worth mentioning that each writer had a different audience in mind. For example, Matthew was writing for a largely Jewish audience while Mark, who was probably based in Rome, would have had a readership that was largely Gentile.

But now, putting Matthew’s and Mark’s accounts together, let’s look at the implications of what Jesus says about marriage and divorce. The Pharisees begin by asking Jesus, Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?" The question was relevant because at the time of Jesus there were two schools of thought among the Jewish rabbis. The followers of Shammai maintained that only unchastity or adultery were grounds for a man divorcing his wife. On the other hand, the disciples of Hillel allowed divorce for the slightest reason – even something as trivial as bad cooking!

Jesus answers their question in Matthew 19:11 where he says that divorce should be limited to cases of porneia – adultery or marital unfaithfulness. But his first response to their question is to ask them, What did Moses command you? To which they say, Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away. But in saying this the Pharisees are not being honest with the text of the very passage they are referring to. All that Moses says in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is that if a divorced woman marries another man, and if he also divorces her, she may not be remarried to her first husband.

Jesus, however, refuses to get embroiled in an argument about the interpretation of the Law of Moses, but tells them the reason why it was given: It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law. (Notice incidentally that Jesus interprets the scripture by looking at the reason for which it was given in the first place. When we’re interpreting scripture it’s always important to ask why it was written). Even the Pharisees had acknowledged that Moses had permitted divorce. He had not commanded it. Now Jesus explains why Moses had permitted it – because your hearts were hard (v5).

But what does Jesus mean by saying because your hearts were hard? Jeremiah 17:9 tells us that the heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately sick (ESV). This is true in all generations because of our fallen nature, and at the time of Moses that was particularly evident in the context of marriage, because men saw themselves as free to put away their wives for any reason, no matter how trivial.

And it’s important to note that there was no provision in the law of Moses for a wife to divorce her husband! Men tended to view their wives as their property – something which may be reflected in the tenth commandment where women are listed as things that should not be coveted, alongside houses, servants, oxen and donkeys, nor anything that belongs to your neighbour (Exodus 20:17).

So man’s heart was hard because of his fallen nature, and this was reflected in the way they viewed the role of women in general and their wives in particular. But Jesus takes the Pharisees back to long before the law was given and reminds them that divorce was not God’s intention from the beginning. In verses 6-9 he says:

6 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 7 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

He is referring, of course, to Genesis 2:22-24, which says:

22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man." 24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

So in going back to Genesis Jesus sidesteps the trick question set by the Pharisees and takes the opportunity to reveal the true nature of marriage and God’s purpose in it. From his answer we see very clearly five things.

Marriage is between male and female

In verse 6 Jesus says that at the beginning of creation God made them male and female.

Now notice what he says in verse 7:

For this reason (i.e. because God made them male and female) a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife.

Here Jesus is quoting directly from Genesis 2:24. Now in both the Hebrew of Genesis and the Greek of Mark’s Gospel, the word translated as wife in our English Bible is exactly the same as the word used elsewhere for woman. So both the Hebrew and the Greek literally say,

A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his woman.

This shows very clearly that from a Biblical perspective there can be no such thing as a same sex marriage. It’s a contradiction in terms.

Marriage is a uniting of male and female

Now let’s add verse 8 to verse 7:

For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his woman, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one.

This is an obvious reference to sexual intercourse, where a man and a woman are physically united. They become one flesh. But more than that, they are no longer two but one. The implications are surely more than physical. God’s intention for marriage is that the love husband and wife have for each other should result in unity, not merely of the body, but of purpose, intention, faith, heart, mind and soul. How different from the attitude of the Pharisees is the New Testament teaching that husbands should love their wives as their own bodies, as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her (Ephesians 5:25-33).

Marriage is intended to be permanent

It’s interesting that Matthew makes something clear that is not obvious in Mark’s account. In 19:5 he records Jesus as saying that God said the words recorded in Genesis 2:24. It was the Creator himself who at the beginning said, They will become one flesh. And on the strength of this, Jesus says in verse 9, What God has joined together, let not man separate. Jesus is not referring here to what happens in the ceremony we call a wedding. He is referring to what God said at creation. God intends marriage to be permanent, and so should we.

Two or three years after Eileen and I were married, a fifteen-year-old girl in an RE lesson I was teaching asked me a question: Sir, how do you know you will still love your wife in 10 years’ time? To which I replied, Oh, that’s easy. Because I’ve promised to. Love is more than a romantic feeling. It involves an act of the will. And for a Christian, knowing that in God’s sight marriage is for life should be the determining factor in the decision to keep on loving and to stay married till death us do part. But where does that leave the matter of divorce?

Divorce was a concession but not God’s perfect plan

As we’ve already seen, even the Pharisees acknowledged that Moses permitted a man to divorce his wife (v4). In the next verse Jesus does not deny this but says that it was only because of their hardness of heart, which we’ve already talked about. God’s perfect plan was that people should stay together. But because of the weakness of our human nature, he allowed divorce in certain circumstances, but NOT for any and every reason as the followers of the school of Hillel were teaching. But that brings us to our final point.

Divorce for any and every reason followed by remarriage leads to adultery, except where there has been marital unfaithfulness.

We’ve already mentioned that Matthew includes some words of Jesus that are not recorded in Mark. In Matthew, Jesus says:

I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

In the Greek, the word for marital unfaithfulness is porneia. This word has a fairly wide range of meaning (adultery, unchastity, prostitution etc.) but is invariably connected with some form of sexual activity. That’s presumably why NIV translates it as marital unfaithfulness. This appears to be the only basis on which Jesus allows a man to divorce his wife – or presumably a wife to divorce her husband. I say this because Mark 10:11-12 indicates that what applies to the husband applies to the wife too. But how does all this apply to us today?

First, let me say that I’m well aware that sincere Christians have very different views on this and that we all need to tread carefully as what we teach may have a serious effect on the lives of people who are divorced or who are facing very real problems in their marriage. But, having said that, as Christians we must take the teaching of Jesus seriously and should never attempt to water down what he has said. We also need to bear in mind that there are other NT passages which deal with the subject of marriage and divorce and in this short talk I have not attempted to deal with them.

What we have said with regard to this passage is that in the answers Jesus gave the Pharisees he was not attempting to give a full-blown theology of marriage and divorce. He was answering a trick question based on how Deuteronomy 24:1 should be applied in the context of first century Judaism. Nevertheless, what he says relates beyond the context of the day because he takes us back to God’s intention for marriage from the very start. Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is the uniting of that man and woman in a lifelong relationship. Man must not separate what God has joined together.

Nevertheless, there are, Jesus tells us, certain circumstances in which divorce may be permitted. Those circumstances are cases of marital unfaithfulness, a term which, as we have seen, can cover a variety of forms of sexual activity. But is this really the only legitimate basis for divorce? Could the term be extended to mean unfaithfulness of a nonsexual nature like persistent physical violence, for example? If a man commits adultery, he is breaking the covenant that he made with his wife. Would he not also be breaking that covenant if he beat her black and blue? Would she not have the right to divorce him?

If we insist on the letter of what Jesus said, we would have to say no. But Jesus’ example teaches us (as we have seen in this passage) to look beyond the letter of the law to the reason behind it. To say this is not to legitimate divorce for any and every reason. But such an approach does allow us to consider the spirit rather than the letter of the law and to apply it with sensitivity and compassion to those who find themselves, through no fault of their own, in an impossible marital situation.

I offer this suggestion in a spirit of humility, knowing that there will be those who radically disagree. All I can say is that after more than 60 years in church leadership I know that there is no easy answer. Every case is different and church leaders need to pray for wisdom and the help of the Holy Spirit in seeking to understand the scriptures and to apply the principles that the Lord Jesus has taught us.

View Details

Talk 28 Mark 9:30-50 Self-denial and total commitment

Welcome to Talk 28 in our series on Mark's Gospel. Today we're looking at Mark 9:30-50 where Jesus teaches his disciples lessons that are essential for all those who would follow him. The passage begins with the statement that Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were, because he was teaching his disciples (vv30-31). And, as we look at the passage, we discover that what Jesus is teaching is self-denial and total commitment. But first, let’s read the rest of the passage, beginning in verse 31.

He said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise." 32 But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.

33 They came to Capernaum. When he was in the house, he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the road?" 34 But they kept quiet because on the way they had argued about who was the greatest. 35 Sitting down, Jesus called the Twelve and said, "If anyone wants to be first, he must be the very last, and the servant of all." 36 He took a little child and had him stand among them. Taking him in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me."

38 "Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us." 39 "Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.

42 "And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. 45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where "'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.' Everyone will be salted with fire. 50 "Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with each other."

Jesus begins by reminding his disciples what he has already told them more than once. He is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise (31). The disciples don’t understand this yet, but it will be essential that they do. The reason Jesus came to earth was to die on the cross to save us from our sins. It would involve self-denial and total commitment – saying No to self and Yes to God. And this would be the example he set for his followers (1 Peter 2:21). And now he is teaching his disciples in advance that following him will mean following his example of self-denial and total commitment.

And in today’s passage we see various ways how Jesus challenges us to do the same.

The challenge of self-denial

There is to be no self-seeking among the followers of Jesus (33-37)

In our last talk we saw how the disciples were arguing with the teachers of the Law. Now we discover them arguing among themselves (v33). And they’re arguing about who was the greatest. We’re not told the details, but it may well have been over who they thought would get the best positions in the Messianic kingdom Jesus was about to bring in. Perhaps Peter, James and John felt they had a claim to greatness because of the privilege they had had to be present at the transfiguration. We know that James and John had aspirations like that because of what we’re told in the next chapter where they ask Jesus:

Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory (10:37).

But to such ambition Jesus replies:

If anyone wants to be first, he must be the very last, and the servant of all (9:35),

and taking a little child in his arms he says:

Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 18:4) and adds:

Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me (Mark 9:37).

Selfish ambition may bring glory to oneself, but it doesn’t bring glory to Jesus. It only causes division and dissention among the followers. So there is to be no self-seeking among the followers of Jesus, but, closely connected to this, our passage also shows that there is to be no competition among them either.

There is to be no competition among the followers of Jesus (38-41)

In verse 38 John tells Jesus that they have seen a man driving out demons in Jesus’ name but that they stopped him because he was not one of us. But Jesus replies

Do not stop him. No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.

It’s certainly possible that the disciples’ reason for stopping the man was well intentioned. They knew that as his disciples they had been specially chosen by Jesus and that he had designated them apostles (Mark 3:14). They had been in his close company since he first called them to be fishers of men. What right had other people to think they could speak in Jesus’ name (i.e. with his authority)?

Their motivation could well have been like that of Joshua in Numbers 11:28, when out of loyalty to Moses he asks him to stop Eldad and Medad from prophesying because they had not been in the Tent of Meeting when the Spirit had come upon them as the rest of the elders had been. To which Moses replied, I wish that all the Lord’s people were prophets and that the Lord would put his Spirit on them.

Moses was secure in his God-given position of leadership and had nothing to fear from what may have appeared to be a challenge to his authority, and how much more secure was Jesus in the knowledge that he was God’s well-beloved Son. He had nothing to fear from a man who was not one of his immediate disciples driving out demons in his name. And a person using his name to do so could not possibly say anything bad about him (v38).

But what does he mean when he says, Whoever is not against us is for us? Did he not say on another occasion, He who is not with me is against me (Matthew 12:30)? Of course there is no contradiction in these two statements. In God’s sight there are only two kinds of people in the world – not Jew or Gentile, not male or female, not black or white, not rich or poor etc. – but those who are for Jesus and those who are against him. Neutrality is not an option. And on that hangs our eternal destiny.

But Jesus’ statement also implies that there are those who are actually for him whom we believe to be against him. The Lord knows those who are his. We’re reminded of Elijah in 1 Kings 19:10 who protested to God that he was the only one left who was following him and to whom God replied that there were 7000 in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal (v18). I’m sure that when we get to Heaven we’ll be surprised at some of the people we meet there!

So we need to be careful that we don’t assume that Christians who worship differently than we do, or who do things differently from us, are not really Christians at all. Of course we need to contend earnestly for the precious truths of God’s word, but our motivation in doing so should never be for the reputation or position of our own group or denomination. For example, I don’t believe that infant baptism is scriptural, but that does not mean that some of those who practise it are not being powerfully used in healing and evangelism. Jesus said that anyone who gives you a cup of water (i.e. seeks to help you in the simplest way) …because you belong to Christ, will certainly not lose his reward (v41). There must be cooperation, not competition, among the followers of Jesus.

But that brings us to the second major challenge that Jesus presents to his disciples in this passage – the challenge of total commitment.

The challenge of total commitment (vv42-50)

In these verses Jesus warns his disciples about the seriousness of sin. Our sin can, not only keep us out of Heaven, but also keep others out too. He challenges us to a life of total commitment, a life that pleases God.

Verse 42 contains a strong warning about causing anyone else to sin, especially those who are children, but it could also be taken to refer to those who are young in their faith. A spirit of competition among Christians or a personal ambition for greatness can easily do just that. Such attitudes are a poor example to set to new believers. There’s the twofold danger that they either follow the example we are setting, or that they will be completely put off the faith because of it.

Sin is so serious that in verses 43-47 Jesus uses what may seem like an extreme illustration to make his point. If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off… if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off… if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. In other words, Get rid of anything that causes you to sin. If your sin is not dealt with, Jesus says, only hell awaits.

If this seems harsh, we need to remember that Jesus has already provided a way for us to get rid of our sin. That’s why he died, taking the punishment our sins deserved. We get rid our sin and its consequences when we receive Jesus as our Saviour. Heaven, not hell, is our destiny. But that does not mean that the moment we become Christians we start to live sinless lives. In fact, if we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves (1 John1:8), but, thank God, If we confess our sin, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9).

But God’s promise of forgiveness does not mean that we should go on sinning. Our sins are forgiven, but sin is still serious. That’s why Jesus tells us to cut off anything that causes it. And cutting something off can be painful. Giving up something we enjoy or someone we love may well be costly, but if we know that it or they may lead us, or others, into temptation, we also know that it will be worth it in order to maintain our right standing with God.

As we’ve already pointed out, our sin can affect the eternal destiny of others if it leads them to follow our example or abandon the faith. That’s why Jesus says in verse 50:

Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with each other.

As Christians we can make a real difference in the world we live in, rather like salt changes the flavour of food (Matthew 5:13), and just as salt preserves food from decay, we can counteract the moral decay we see in the world around us. If, like the disciples in today’s passage, we’re arguing and quarrelling among ourselves, how can we expect to influence the society in which we live? If we cannot live at peace with each other, we will lose our saltiness and we’ll be of little use in the Lord’s service. That’s why, as we’ve already seen, there must be no self-seeking or competition among the followers of Jesus. He challenges us to self-denial and total commitment.

And if that seems hard, just remember that that is exactly what Jesus did.

View Details

Talk 16 Mark 6:1-13 Preaching the gospel in a hostile environment

Welcome to Talk 16 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’ll be looking at Mark 16:1-13. We’ll be concentrating on verses 1-5 where Mark tells us that Jesus was unable to do any mighty miracle in his home town because of the people’s unbelief, and then we’ll see how this relates to verses 6-13 where Jesus sends out the twelve apostles. We’ll begin by reading verses 1-6.

1 Jesus left there and went to his home town, accompanied by his disciples. 2 When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed. "Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3 Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him. 4 Jesus said to them, "Only in his home town, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honour." 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 And he was amazed at their lack of faith…

1 Jesus left there and went to his home town, accompanied by his disciples.

Jesus leaves the home of Jairus and travels with his disciples away from the shore of Lake Galilee to his home town of Nazareth. He had been born in Bethlehem, and, as we’ve seen in previous talks, the base for his ministry was Capernaum, but he was always known as Jesus of Nazareth because that is where he had been brought up. So by Jesus’ home town Mark means Nazareth.

2 When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue

He does in Nazareth exactly what he has done elsewhere. He begins to teach in the synagogue. By saying that Jesus began to teach Mark is indicating that Jesus might well have continued to teach there if only the people had accepted him. Mark doesn’t tell us here what Jesus’ message was, but he would expect us to assume that it was in line with what he has already told us in Mark 1:14-15:

… Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God. "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!

But the people of Nazareth would not believe the good news. They took offense at him (v3). Why? Because the good news is Jesus! They were amazed. They asked, Where did this man get these things? They recognised that he had been given wisdom and acknowledged that he worked miracles. But they could not look beyond the fact that they had known him as the carpenter. So in verse 3 they say:

3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?”

Despite the supernatural evidence of the miracles they had heard about, they refused to look beyond the natural. Yes, he was the carpenter. Yes, he was the son of Mary – if they had heard the story of his virgin birth, they had clearly not believed it.

Yes, he was the half-brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon and his sisters. But didn’t the miracles show that he was so much more! He was, in the opening words of Mark’s Gospel, Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

And they took offense at him.

The verb that’s used here is closely connected with the noun skandalon which is frequently used in the New Testament to mean a stumbling block or something that trips you up. What tripped up the people of Nazareth was their refusal to see beyond the humanity of Jesus. And Paul, using the same word in 1 Corinthians 1:23, tells us that the Jews in general stumble at the message of Christ crucified. There is a danger that our preconceived ideas prevent us from seeing the whole truth about Jesus.

4 Jesus said to them, "Only in his home town, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honour."

This reminds us of Luke 4:24 which records Jesus as saying, No prophet is accepted in his home town. Note the word accepted. The problem with the people of Nazareth was that they refused to accept Jesus. It’s interesting that Luke’s account of this whole incident is far more detailed than Mark’s. He tells us that Jesus read from the passage in Isaiah where it says:

The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour (Luke 4:18-19, quoting Isaiah 61:1-2).

Luke goes on to tell us that Jesus went on to say, Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing (v21), and that the people spoke well of Jesus and were amazed at the way he spoke. As in Mark 6, their amazement sprang from the fact that they knew his family. Their familiarity with his humanity prevented them from seeing his divinity. They had heard of the miracles Jesus had performed in Capernaum and were expecting him to do something similar in Nazareth (v23).

But Jesus knew that they would not accept him, and provocatively stated:

I tell you the truth… no prophet is accepted in his hometown. 25 I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah's time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. 26 Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. 27 And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed – only Naaman the Syrian (vv24-27).

As a result, Luke tells us that:

All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. 29 They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him down the cliff. 30 But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way (vv28-30).

So they not only refused to accept him. They actually tried to destroy him! But, perhaps surprisingly, Mark leaves out all this detail and simply tells us in verses 5-6:

He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. And he was amazed at their lack of faith…

Does Mark really mean that Jesus could not do any miracles there? Couldn’t Jesus do anything? We may be tempted to say that Jesus could have but chose not to do any miracle there. But that is not what Mark says. The Greek literally means he was unable to do. So how do we explain this? Of course, God can do anything, but he has sovereignly chosen to work in response to faith. Jesus only did what he saw the Father do (John 5:19). He was unable to work outside of the parameters by which God has chosen to operate. So he was unable to do any miracle (literally, powerful thing) there because of their lack of faith, although presumably a few sick people had enough faith to be healed.

I personally believe that this teaches us a very important principle. We know from experience that miracles seem to happen more frequently in some places than in others and we wonder why. The answer lies in this passage. Community unbelief inhibits the miraculous. If even Jesus could do no miracle in a place because of unbelief, we must not be surprised if we find that the same is true for us today.

But why is faith so important? The answer lies in the message of salvation. Salvation is by faith. Jesus preached, Repent, and believe the good news. He came because God loves us. He came to give his life a ransom for many. He came to take the punishment our sins deserved, so that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. He knew that we would never be good enough for Heaven by our own self effort. That’s why he made a way for us to be saved by faith. Accepting Jesus, believing in him, is the only way to be saved. That’s why faith is important.

And that’s why Jesus worked miracles and why he commissioned his disciples to do so. He came to die for us. He wanted people to have faith in him for salvation, and miracles encourage faith. They give a practical demonstration of God’s love for us. By working miracles Jesus was giving people every opportunity to believe. But if they refuse to believe despite the evidence of the miracles, they will have no excuse when they stand before God on the day of judgment. Our eternal destiny is determined by whether or not we accept Jesus. But sadly, for the time being at least, the people of Nazareth would not, and so Jesus leaves them and goes around teaching from village to village (v6). But now let’s read verses 7-13.

7 Calling the Twelve to him, he sent them out two by two and gave them authority over evil spirits. 8 These were his instructions: "Take nothing for the journey except a staff – no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. 9 Wear sandals but not an extra tunic. 10 Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. 11 And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them." 12 They went out and preached that people should repent. 13 They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them.

7 Calling the Twelve to him, he sent them out two by two and gave them authority over evil spirits

We know from Mark 3:14-15 that Jesus had already chosen his twelve apostles so that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons. These verses express Jesus’ purpose in choosing them, but it’s not until now in chapter 6 that Jesus actually gives them that authority and sends them out. God’s timing is so important. He often reveals his purposes for us before he intends us to begin to fulfil them. And he gives us the authority we need as and when we need it. In the case of the Twelve, it was almost certainly so that they might have time to learn from his teaching and example before he gave them authority and sent them out to preach. It was by following him that he would make them fishers of men (1:17).

The specific instructions Jesus’ gave on this occasion are recorded in more detail by Matthew, where it is clear that this was a specific mission to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 10:6), but not at this time to the Samaritans or the Gentiles. That would come later. And where Mark only mentions that Jesus gave them authority over evil spirits, Matthew includes authority to heal every kind of sickness and disease, to cleanse lepers, and even raise the dead.

Some Christians take the view that these passages are intended to indicate that as Christians we all have the right to ‘take authority’ over these things, but that ignores the fact that nowhere in the Bible are we told to take authority. We only have authority if we are given it. Even Jesus’ authority was given him by God (Matthew 18:19). The fact that Jesus gave this authority to twelve specific disciples at a specific time and for a specific mission does not automatically mean that he has given it to you or me today.

Indeed, these very disciples, after Jesus had ascended into Heaven, had to wait to receive the power of the Spirit. In the Gospels they worked miracles with a specific authority given them by the Lord Jesus, but in Acts he would continue to work miracles through them as they were led and empowered by the Holy Spirit. And so it is with us. We can, and we should, expect the Lord to work through us in miraculous ways, but only as we are led by the Spirit.

The fact that he sent them out in pairs provides us with a wise example of how we should work today. Teamwork is essential. However great our gifting or experience, none of us is infallible, and we all need the wisdom, support and encouragement that comes from others who work alongside us. This principle was followed by the disciples in Acts – e.g. Peter and John, Paul and Barnabas etc., although Paul’s apostolic teams were often larger than two. The basic principle is that we should not go it alone.

8 These were his instructions: "Take nothing for the journey except a staff – no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. 9 Wear sandals but not an extra tunic.

Again, these instructions were given with regard to a specific mission, and we should certainly not assume that when we go out on evangelism we must never take any money with us and that we should wear sandals rather than shoes! But we can certainly learn from the principles Jesus was teaching.

We can trust the Lord to meet our needs as we seek to proclaim the good news. How can we have faith to work miracles if we cannot trust God to provide for our basic needs? The Christian life is by faith from first to last.

10 Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. 11 And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them."

Amazed at the lack of faith of the people of Nazareth (v6), Jesus was only too aware of the opposition that he and his disciples were facing. Nevertheless, people must be given the opportunity to accept him, or to reject him. So he sent his disciples out to preach the good news to the surrounding villages, knowing that some would not listen. The disciples were to shake the dust off their feet as a testimony against those who rejected the message.

This was something Jewish people did when passing through a Gentile town or village. It was a sign that they were distancing themselves from them because they were different. They were the people of God. But Jesus’ disciples were not visiting Gentile towns or villages on this mission (Matthew 10:5). They were visiting Jewish villages. So by shaking the dust off their feet the disciples were showing the Jews that there is a distinction between those who believe the good news and those who reject it. Only those who accept Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile, are truly the people of God.

In most cultures today shaking the dust off one’s feet would mean nothing to those who might be watching, but as Christians we need to show by what we say and how we live that we are different from those who deny Christ. We have a different lifestyle and a different destiny.

12 They went out and preached that people should repent. 13 They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them.

We saw in Mark 1:15 that Jesus’ message was, The time has come. The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news. The miracles were the evidence. They helped people to believe. Sadly, as we have seen in today’s passage, there were those who refused to believe despite the evidence. Could this have been because they were not willing to repent? It’s much the same today. There’s plenty of evidence for the truth of the Christian message, but many refuse to believe it because of the implications it has for their lifestyle.

So what can we learn from this passage about preaching the gospel in a hostile environment? Follow the example of Jesus. Proclaim the good news. Expect miraculous confirmation of the message. Miracles demonstrate God’s love and make it easier for people to believe. Remember that Jesus gave his disciples authority for that specific mission. After he had returned to Heaven they received their authority from the Holy Spirit. As we keep filled with the Spirit he will lead us and empower us. The Holy Spirit will enable people to repent and believe, but he will not force them to do so. If people adamantly refuse our message we should move on to those who will accept it. Whether they accept it or reject it, it’s our responsibility whether people accept it or not to tell them the truth. We are not to blame if people refuse to accept Christ. But it is our responsibility to point out the consequences of doing so.

View Details

Talk 27 Mark 9:9-29 Jesus heals a demon-possessed boy

Welcome to Talk 27 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. In our last talk we were considering what we can learn about Heaven from the story of Jesus’ transfiguration at the top of a high mountain. Today we’re looking at Mark 9:9-29 where Jesus heals a demon-possessed boy. In verses 9-13 we read how, coming back down the mountain, Peter, James and John ask Jesus about a verse in Malachi which said that before the Messiah came, Elijah must come first. In Matthew’s account Jesus identifies this ‘Elijah’ as John the Baptist who had already been rejected and put to death for what he had preached. And Jesus then reminds his disciples that it would also be necessary for him to suffer too.

But verses 14-15 tell us that at this point they saw the other disciples and …a large crowd around them and the teachers of the law arguing with them. And that …as soon as all the people saw Jesus, they were overwhelmed with wonder and ran to greet him.

When Jesus asks them what they’re arguing about (v16), a man in the crowd answers.

Teacher, I brought you my son, who is possessed by a spirit that has robbed him of speech. Whenever it seizes him, it throws him to the ground. He foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth and becomes rigid. I asked your disciples to drive out the spirit, but they could not (vv17-18).

I expect that most of my listeners will be familiar with this story, but let’s just remind ourselves of the details by reading verses 19-29:

19 "O unbelieving generation," Jesus replied, "how long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring the boy to me."

20 So they brought him. When the spirit saw Jesus, it immediately threw the boy into a convulsion. He fell to the ground and rolled around, foaming at the mouth.

21 Jesus asked the boy's father, "How long has he been like this?" "From childhood," he answered.

22 "It has often thrown him into fire or water to kill him. But if you can do anything, take pity on us and help us."

23 "'If you can'?" said Jesus. "Everything is possible for him who believes." 24 Immediately the boy's father exclaimed, "I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!"

25 When Jesus saw that a crowd was running to the scene, he rebuked the evil spirit. "You deaf and mute spirit," he said, "I command you, come out of him and never enter him again."

26 The spirit shrieked, convulsed him violently and came out. The boy looked so much like a corpse that many said, "He's dead."

27 But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him to his feet, and he stood up.

28 After Jesus had gone indoors, his disciples asked him privately, "Why couldn't we drive it out?"

29 He replied, "This kind can come out only by prayer."

This passage teaches us four main things:

· The desperate condition of the boy

· The cause of the problem

· The inability of the teachers and the disciples

· The secret of Jesus’ authority.

The desperate condition of the boy

He was unable to hear or speak

He was possessed by a spirit that has robbed him of speech (17)

Jesus says, You deaf and mute spirit, I command you, come out of him (25).

He suffered violent convulsions

Whenever it seizes him, it throws him to the ground. He foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth and becomes rigid (18)

When the spirit saw Jesus, it immediately threw the boy into a convulsion. He fell to the ground and rolled around, foaming at the mouth (20)

The spirit shrieked, convulsed him violently and came out (26).

His life was often in danger

It has often thrown him into fire or water to kill him (22)

His condition was longstanding

Jesus asked the boy's father, "How long has he been like this?" "From childhood," he answered (21).

His condition was incurable

They saw the other disciples and a large crowd around them and the teachers of the law arguing with them (14)

I asked your disciples to drive out the spirit, but they could not (18)

The cause of the problem

The passage makes clear that the boy’s condition was caused by a deaf and mute spirit that needed to be cast out of him. However, the symptoms of his condition were very similar to certain forms of what we refer to today as epilepsy. As a result, some have assumed that all those with epileptic symptoms have a demon that needs to be exorcised. However, since epilepsy is usually treatable with the right medication, and since it seems unlikely that demonic forces could be controlled by medical means, this view is clearly mistaken, especially bearing in mind the pastoral difficulties that would almost certainly arise if this theory were put into practice.

Equally mistaken is the view that demons do not exist and that in those days, without the knowledge that we have today, people mistakenly assumed that all sickness was caused by evil spirits. But if that view were correct we would have to conclude that Jesus himself was mistaken when he said:

You deaf and mute spirit …I command you, come out of him and never enter him again (v25).

So what’s the solution? Quite simply, in some cases epileptic symptoms may result from the activity of evil spirits, but that does not mean that they always are. It’s interesting that in Matthew 4:24 those having seizures are distinguished from the demon-possessed making it clear that they’re not the same. But Jesus healed them all. Prayer for healing is always appropriate, but we need always to be led by the Holy Spirit in how we pray. Attempting to cast out something that isn’t there will cause more harm than good.

But this passage reminds us how evil Satan is. We see how he torments and tries to destroy. As Jesus said in John 10:10, The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. And as we look around us at the world today we see abundant evidence of his work. Not only the thousands of lives being destroyed in war zones like Ukraine and Gaza, but the young people being led astray by his lies in so many different ways leading them to do things that are contrary to God’s natural created order of things. The Holy Spirit has clearly stated that

…in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons (1 Timothy 4:1)

and this is undoubtedly being fulfilled before our very eyes. Satan not only works through demon possession, but by putting perverse ideas into people’s heads that are even now being taught to the children in our schools, and have led to an unprecedented crisis in mental and emotional health.

The inability of the teachers and the disciples

When Jesus came back down the mountain, he found the disciples and the teachers of the Law arguing. When he asked them what they were arguing about, the boy’s father answered telling Jesus about the desperate condition his son was in and his disciples’ inability to help. So it seems that the argument was about the boy.

We don’t know the details of the argument, but perhaps the teachers of the law were challenging the disciples’ authority to drive out the demon. But if so, why didn’t they drive it out? In Matthew 12:27 Jesus acknowledged that some of the Jews were exorcists. We don’t know the answer to these questions, but what is clear is that while they were arguing, the boy was still being tormented. Could it be that even today people are suffering because we Christians are too busy arguing with the opposition rather than using the authority Jesus has given us to set them free?

But that brings us to why the disciples couldn’t drive it out. Mark 6:31 tells us that they had already cast out demons. However, on this occasion they were unable to do so. The Greek verbs used in verses 18 and 28 imply that they were not strong enough and did not have the power to deal with this demon. The passage gives us two reasons why:

· Lack of faith (v19) Cf Matthew 17:20 Because you have so little faith.

· Lack of prayer (v29).

So which was it? The answer must surely be both. There is no contradiction here. Faith comes by hearing from God, and prayer, communing with God, is how we hear from him. It’s through prayer that we know what God wants us to do and receive the faith to do it. But that brings us to:

The secret of Jesus’ authority

Notice:

The authority with which Jesus speaks

in verse 19: Bring the boy to me.

In verse 25: I command you, come out of him

The immediate reaction from the demon

in verse 20: When the spirit saw Jesus, it immediately threw the boy into a convulsion.

In verses 26: The spirit shrieked, convulsed him violently and came out.

Matthew 17:18 Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of the boy, and he was healed from that moment.

Why did Jesus have such authority over the demon?

It’s clear from these verses that Jesus had total authority over the demon. But why? Not just because he was God, because it’s clear from verse 19 that he expected his disciples to have been able to do it. The secret of his authority lies in the answers he gave the disciples when they asked why they had been unable to do it. Because of the communion he had with his Father through his prayer life, Jesus had faith. Look at verses 22 and 23 again. The boy’s father says, If you can do anything, take pity on us… to which Jesus replies:

‘If you can'? …Everything is possible for him who believes.

The emphasis here is on the word if, not on the word you. Jesus is not saying that if the father can believe, the boy’s healing will be possible – though that is not to deny the importance of having faith when we come to God with our requests – what Jesus is really saying may be paraphrased as follows:

You are doubting if I can, but I assure you that I can because I believe, and everything is possible to those who believe.

Jesus works the miracle, not because of the father’s imperfect faith, but because he himself had faith. He had faith in his own authority because he lived his life under the authority of God. That’s how he had conquered Satan in the wilderness. He knew what the Father wanted him to do, and he did it. He only did the things he saw the Father do (John 5:19). He was a man of authority because he was a man under authority (Matthew 8:8-10). The secret of his success lay not in his deity but in his submission as a man to the absolute authority of God. With that kind of authority, there is no need to argue as the disciples had. When we know we have heard from God, and only when we know it, we have authority to speak the word of command knowing that in Jesus’ name, with his authority, we too can drive out demons and heal the sick (Mark 16:15ff). But there are no shortcuts, no magic formulae. This kind can come out only by prayer and the faith that results from hearing from God.

View Details

Talk 26 Mark 9:1-8 The Transfiguration – a Glimpse of Heaven

Welcome to Talk 26 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 9:1-8 where we read of a truly awesome event in the life of Jesus and three of his disciples. It’s what is known as the transfiguration. The chapter begins with Jesus saying:

I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power.

There has been much discussion about what Jesus meant by this, but in my view the explanation is almost certainly found in the following verses where we read how Jesus took Peter, James and John up a high mountain and he was transfigured before them (v2). So let’s begin by reading verses 2-8:

2 After six days Jesus took Peter, James and John with him and led them up a high mountain, where they were all alone. There he was transfigured before them. 3 His clothes became dazzling white, whiter than anyone in the world could bleach them. 4 And there appeared before them Elijah and Moses, who were talking with Jesus. 5 Peter said to Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters – one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah." 6 (He did not know what to say, they were so frightened.) 7 Then a cloud appeared and enveloped them, and a voice came from the cloud: "This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!" 8 Suddenly, when they looked around, they no longer saw anyone with them except Jesus.

Transfiguration is not a word that’s in common use today, but its basic meaning is transformation. The Greek word that’s used in verse 2 is metamorpho’o from which we get our English word metamorphosis which we use to mean a change in the form of a person or thing into a completely different one, as, for example, when a caterpillar turns into a chrysalis and then into a butterfly. In the case of Jesus, Mark tells us that

his clothes became dazzling white, whiter than anyone in the world could bleach them,

but in 2 Peter 1:16-18 Peter himself describes what he saw:

16 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received honour and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." 18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

He refers to the transfiguration as the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Compare this with what Jesus said in verse 1 about the kingdom of God coming with power). He uses words like, majesty, honour, glory, and God’s voice coming from the Majestic Glory. It seems clear to me that what Peter is describing is nothing less than a glimpse or foretaste of Heaven itself.

Of course, the day is coming when Jesus will finally come in power and great glory, a day Jesus refers to in 8:38 when he talks about the Son of Man coming in his Father’s glory with the holy angels. But that was not to happen yet. Jesus must first suffer and die and rise again (v12). The transfiguration was not the second coming, but it was certainly a prophetic foretaste of it, a revelation of Jesus in power and glory, that Peter wanted to assure his readers was not a cleverly invented story. He had seen it for himself. He knew it was true. And, as he was approaching the end of his earthly life, his hope and his faith for eternity were securely founded on the revelation of Heaven he had received on that mountain.

So, with this in mind, let’s look at the passage and see what we can learn about Heaven.

What is Heaven like?

If you know Jesus as your Saviour, you’re already on your way to Heaven, but do you have any real idea what it’s going to be like? My wife, Eileen, went to Heaven recently and I’ve been trying to imagine her there. Actually, I’ve found it quite hard, and I’ve realised how little we know about Heaven. Of course the Book of Revelation paints a certain picture for us, but it contains so much symbolism that it’s hard to know whether some passages are to be taken literally or metaphorically.

Even the great apostle Paul had to admit that now we know only in part (1 Corinthians 13:12) and that we cannot yet imagine the things that God has prepared for those who love him (1 Corinthians 2:9). So it looks as though we’ll have to wait and see. But that does not mean that we know nothing about what Heaven is like, and today’s passage gives us some clear pointers.

Heaven is a place of dazzling purity and awesome majesty

In verse 3 Mark tells us that Jesus’ clothes became dazzling white, whiter than anyone in the world could bleach them. In Matthew 17:1 we’re told his face shone like the sun. Paul on the road to Damascus had a glimpse of that brightness. Testifying before King Agrippa he says:

At midday, I saw in the way, O king, out of heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round me a light – and having fallen to the earth…I heard a voice… (Acts26:13-14).

John on the Isle of Patmos saw it too:

His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades (Revelation 1:14-18).

Heaven is a place of dazzling purity and awesome majesty. But it’s a place where it’s good to be – a place where you’ll want to stay! Notice what Peter says in verse 5:

Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters – one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.

Of course he didn’t realise what he was saying. Jesus, Moses and Elijah would not have needed shelters! All Peter knew was that he wanted the experience to last.

Heaven is a place where the righteous dead are still living

v4 And there appeared before them Elijah and Moses, who were talking with Jesus.

The Sadducees, who did not believe in life after death, once asked Jesus about a woman who had had seven different husbands because they all died one after the other. In the next life, whose wife would she be? Jesus replied that they were making a big mistake because they neither knew the power of God nor understood the Scriptures.

Quoting the well-known passage in Exodus 3, he pointed out that God had revealed himself to Moses, saying, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. The point here is that God did not say, I was. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had all died centuries before God said this. Yet God still said I am. He was still their God centuries after they had died, so they must be still alive!

Now, in today’s passage, we have another evidence of this. Moses and Elijah appeared and were talking with Jesus. They had both died centuries earlier and Moses had died well before Elijah was born. So they were still alive long after they had died. What’s more, they were recognisable. We don’t know how the disciples knew who they were. Perhaps they overheard them referring to each other by name – it doesn’t really matter. What does matter is that in Heaven we will be able to recognise and communicate with each other, even with Christians of earlier generations whom we have never met.

Furthermore, they were not only recognisable, they seem to have been still serving God. It must surely have been God who sent them to have this conversation with Jesus. The exact details and the purpose of the conversation we do not know, but Luke tells us that they were speaking about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfilment at Jerusalem (Luke 9:31). More of this later, but I’m glad that in the life to come it seems that God will have something for us to do!

Heaven is a place where Jesus is recognised for who he is

At the transfiguration God declares Jesus to be his Son (v7). The disciples are to listen to HIM. He is exalted above both Moses (representing the Law) and Elijah (representing the prophets). He fulfilled them both and supersedes them both. All authority is given to him.

No wonder Peter could say that Jesus received honour and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

Heaven is a place where Jesus is recognised for who he really is, and only those who recognise it will be welcome in Heaven. In the end the disciples are left seeing no-one except Jesus (v8). In the final analysis, Jesus is all that matters. Not the Law. Not the prophets. Just Jesus. It’s our response to him that will determine our final destiny.

Experiencing a foretaste of Heaven

I have already suggested that the disciples’ experience of the transfiguration was a glimpse or foretaste of Heaven itself. But that raises the question whether it’s possible for us today to have such a foretaste – obviously not an identical one, because that was unique, but is there any sense in which Christians can experience a taste of heaven today? And the answer is certainly yes. They are rarely, if ever, as dramatic as that of the disciples at the transfiguration, but Hebrews 6 tells us that as Christians we have tasted the heavenly gift and… shared in the Holy Spirit… and tasted the good word of God and the powers of the coming age (vv4-5).

In my book, Just a Taste of Heaven, I have sought to show that the supernatural healings we receive now through the power of the Spirit are best understood as a foretaste of the age to come, when we will enjoy permanent good health in the new imperishable bodies we will receive when Jesus comes again (1 Corinthians 15:52-54). But of course, healing is not the only foretaste. All the supernatural gifts of the Spirit are available, as he determines, to bring us into a new dimension beyond the natural level of our everyday lives.

This is confirmed by Paul’s use of Greek words like arrabon and aparche to refer to the Holy Spirit. Both these words indicate that through the Spirit now we may receive a foretaste of what Heaven will be like. But these experiences are of course just a taste! There’s much much more when Jesus comes again! But for a detailed explanation you might like to take a look at the final chapter of my book, The Holy Spirit – and Introduction, or listen to podcasts 022-024.

Meanwhile, as we wait for Heaven, there’s a sense in which we ourselves are being transformed. The same verb as is used for Jesus being transfigured, or transformed, is used elsewhere about Christians. In Romans 12:2 Paul encourages us not to be conformed to this world, but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds. And in 2 Corinthians 3:18 he tells us that

…we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

For us the transformation is gradual. The extent to which we reflect the Lord’s glory will depend on how much time we spend in his presence renewing our minds. Remember, the disciples experienced the transfiguration while they were alone with Jesus (v2).

What makes Heaven possible for us

We said earlier that the transfiguration was a metamorphosis – a change in the form of a person into a completely different one – not a different person, but a different form. But actually this was not the first transfiguration. Jesus had changed his form before.

Look for a moment at Philippians 2:5-8, which translated literally reads like this:

Jesus, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself empty, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross!

The word I have translated as form is morphe from which is derived metamorpho’o, the word used to refer to the transfiguration in Mark 9. So the first ‘transfiguration’ was the incarnation. At the incarnation he remained God but took upon himself the form of a man. At the transfiguration, he remained a man, but took again for a brief moment the form of God which he later resumed after his resurrection and ascension. Our salvation was only possible because Jesus was willing to take the form of a servant, to be made in human likeness, to appear as a man, and to humble himself to death on a cross.

As we have seen, he came to fulfil the Law and the Prophets, to live a sinless life in obedience to his Father, to suffer and die in our place. We mentioned earlier that Luke tells us that Elijah and Moses were speaking with Jesus about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfilment (or accomplish) at Jerusalem (Luke 9:31). The word used for departure in this verse is exodos which means a way out. Jesus’ death on the cross was to be his way out.

But it was also to be ours. As God provided a way out of slavery in Egypt for the Israelites in the Book of Exodus, so Jesus has provided a way out for us from the slavery of sin and the death penalty it brings. One day we shall all be transformed into his likeness, for we shall be like him because we shall see him as he is (1 John 3:2). Meanwhile let us seek to be daily transformed by the renewing of our minds and to allow the Holy Spirit to be constantly changing us from one degree of glory to another as we spend time in the glorious presence of Jesus.

View Details

Talk 25 Mark 8:27-38 The Challenge of the Cross

Welcome to Talk 25 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. If you listened to my Easter Sunday message recently (which was not part of this series), you will remember that we concentrated our attention on the repeated emphasis on the use of the word must in connection with Jesus’ death and resurrection. One of the verses we referred to is found in today’s passage:

We saw that it was necessary for Jesus to suffer and to die and to rise again because that was the only way we could be saved. But in today’s passage we see that this was clearly something the disciples, especially Peter, didn’t want to hear. Nevertheless, Jesus went on to insist that not only was it necessary for him to suffer and die, but that if anyone wanted to follow him, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow him (v34).

This presented an enormous challenge to his disciples then, and, if we take Jesus’ words seriously, it is equally challenging for us today. In this passage we see three challenges:

· The challenge of confessing who Jesus really is (27-30)

· The challenge of acknowledging that his death was necessary (31-33)

· The challenge of taking up our cross and following him (34-38).

The challenge of confessing who Jesus really is (27-30)

27 Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, "Who do people say I am?" 28 They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets." 29 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Peter answered, "You are the Christ." 30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.

The important thing here is not what other people – your parents, your brothers and sisters, your friends – say about Jesus. What matters is what you say. And notice that the word is say, not think. Of course, what we say will be affected by what we think, but if we believe that Jesus is who he claimed to be, it’s important that we say so. Paul tells us that

if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved (Romans 10:9).

Of course, Peter had not yet come to understand these things, but by divine revelation (see Matthew 16:17) he had come to believe that Jesus was the Messiah and was not afraid to say so. Others might see Jesus as an outspoken preacher like John the Baptist, or as a powerful miracle worker like Elijah, or as just another prophet or religious leader, but salvation depends on the acknowledgement and confession that JESUS IS LORD. But, as the next few verses make clear, Jesus was not the kind of Messiah that Peter and the other disciples were expecting. They were certainly not expecting a Messiah who would suffer and die.

The challenge of acknowledging that his death was necessary (31-33)

31 He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32 He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. 33 But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."

The disciples would have understood that the Son of Man was a title used for the Messiah in Daniel 7:13-14.

And behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is and everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.

This was almost certainly the kind of Messiah they would have been expecting, and Jesus’ claims that as the Son of Man he had authority on earth to forgive sins (Mark 2:10) and to be Lord of the Sabbath (2:28) would undoubtedly have backed up their conviction. And later in today’s passage Jesus uses the title in connection with his coming in his Father's glory with the holy angels (v38), a theme which he repeats in 13:26 and 14:62. So their expectation was not entirely wrong. But it was only half the story.

Jesus now had to teach them that certain things had to happen first. The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed. We should not be surprised at Peter’s reaction. Surely suffering and rejection and death could not possibly be the role of the Messiah? But in fact they were not only possible. They were essential. The Son of Man must suffer… And Jesus not only rebukes Peter strongly for remonstrating with him, but he repeats the message again and again in chapters 9 and 10 (Mark 9:12, 31; 10:33, 45).

But why was his suffering necessary? Why must he die? Because this was the only way that we could be saved. He died for our sins. He died in our place. He took the punishment our sins deserved. He died, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring us to God.

There was no other good enough to pay the price of sin. He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in.

To be saved we must acknowledge that his death was necessary. Our pride holds us back. Human wisdom rejects the message of the cross (1 Corinthians 1:18-19). We hesitate to admit that it was our shortcomings that made it so. But there was, there is, no other way. The Son of Man came to give his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45), for me, for you, and if it were not so, would the Messiah have allowed himself to be crucified? The challenge faces every man and woman, every boy and girl. The challenge must be faced, and it must be embraced. To be saved I must accept the fact that Jesus died for me.

The challenge of taking up our cross and following him (34-38).

34 Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36 What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? 37 Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? 38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."

Having begun to teach his disciples that it was necessary for him to suffer and die and rise again, Jesus now includes the crowd. What he is about to say applies to everyone. Notice the use of the words anyone and everyone. There can be no exceptions. Acknowledge Christ and be saved or deny Christ and perish. The way of the cross is inevitable, not only for Christ, but for all who will follow him. If he must suffer, then we must expect to suffer too. We must take up our cross and follow him.

Peter, from whom Mark probably obtained most of the material for writing his Gospel, writing to Christian slaves who were being unjustly punished, reminded them of the suffering of Christ and told them:

To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps (1 Peter 2:21).

If the opponents of Christ treated him unfairly, we must not be surprised if they treat us unfairly too. But Jesus said that whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. Throughout the world today there are thousands who are losing their lives because of their faith in Christ.

But suffering for the cause of Christ must not be confused with the things we suffer along with the rest of humanity. By no means all that Christians suffer is caused by persecution. Most of our suffering is caused by the fact that we’re living in a fallen universe. In Romans 8 Paul tells us that, ever since the Fall, creation has been in bondage to decay and has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time (vv21-22). But our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us (v18). Meanwhile we are still eagerly waiting for the redemption of our bodies (v23). So suffering is inevitable. We are not exempt from it. Until Jesus returns we suffer along with the rest of humanity. The difference is that we Christians have hope. If we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him.

So suffering along with the rest of humanity because we’re all living in a fallen universe is not the same as suffering for the sake of Christ. It is not taking up our cross to follow Jesus. Yet this is required of every Christian. Jesus says, If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. This will mean different things for different people, but if I am not denying myself and actively choosing to make sacrifices for the cause of Christ, can I really call myself a Christian?

This choosing to deny ourselves and to live a sacrificial life for Christ is a practical demonstration of what is known as our identification with Christ. When we first came to Jesus for the forgiveness of our sins, believing that he died in our place, God counted Jesus’ death as our death, and we too were accepting his death as our death. That’s why Paul could say that we died with Christ, we were crucified with Christ, buried with Christ, made alive with Christ and raised with Christ. In short, we are identified with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection.

With this in mind, let’s compare verse 31 with verses 34-35. First Jesus teaches them that he, the Son of Man, must suffer many things and be rejected … and that he must be killed and … rise again. Then he says that as his followers his disciples must expect the same:

If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it.

The pattern is the same. Rejection and suffering, followed by resurrection and reward. But of course, we don’t want to suffer. We don’t want to be rejected. But neither did Jesus. Hear him praying in the Garden of Gethsemane,

My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death… My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will (Matthew 26:38-39).

Taking up one’s cross means saying this daily. Not what I want, but what you want. Jesus didn’t want to suffer and die, but he chose the way of the cross, and so must we. But of course, the cross was not the end of the story. He rose again, and so, says Jesus, will we. What a wonderful promise to all who will accept him, but how serious a warning to those who reject him:

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels (v38)

And then he will reward each person according to what he has done (Matthew 16:27).

And in Matthew 10 he says:

32 Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. …38 and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

The choice is ours. And the consequences of that choice are eternal. What choice will you make? Will you accept the challenge of confessing who Jesus really is? Will you acknowledge that his death was necessary for you? Will you take up your cross and follow Jesus?

View Details

It had to happen – or did it?

This week, as I was reading through the Gospel accounts of the resurrection of Jesus, I was struck by a statement in John 20:9 which tells us that the disciples did not yet understand the Scripture that Jesus must rise from the dead.

I found myself asking:

· Why didn’t they understand?

· What was the scripture that John was referring to?

· Why did Jesus have to rise from the dead?

We’ll deal with the first two questions fairly quickly, before answering in more detail why Jesus had to rise from the dead.

Why didn’t they understand?

Four possibilities:

Some things we don’t understand until after they have happened

Their minds were clouded by unbelief – too good to be true?

Jesus had not yet opened their minds to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45)

They had not yet received the Holy Spirit who would guide them into the truth (John 16:13).

What was the scripture that John was referring to?

It’s clear from Acts 2:24-32 that Peter, having been filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, now understood Psalm 16:8-11 to be a clear prophecy that Jesus would rise from the dead. He says in verse 24 that God raised (Jesus) from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

Quoting where the psalm says

my body also will live in hope, because you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay,

Peter applies it directly to the resurrection of Jesus, saying in verse 31 that David saw what was ahead and

spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay.

There are, of course, many other OT passages which prophesy the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ (notably Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53). But we can’t be sure exactly what scripture John had in mind because he doesn’t tell us. What we do know is that Jesus himself had explained to his disciples that

he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life (Matthew 16:21, Mark 8:31, Luke 9:22).

But notice that these verses not only say that he must be raised to life, but that he also must suffer and be killed. So that now widens our question. We need to ask not only why Jesus must be raised to life, but why he must suffer and die in the first place.

Why did Jesus have to suffer, to die and to be raised to life?

Because:

· The Scripture must be fulfilled

· It was the only way that we could be saved

The Scripture must be fulfilled

Matthew 26:53-54

Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?"

Luke 24:25-27

He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

Luke 24:44-47

He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Why are these references to the fulfilment of Scripture so important? Because what God says in the Bible MUST come to pass. He said, Let there be light, and there was light. What he says, happens. Jesus had to rise from the dead because in the Bible God had said he would. We’ve also seen that it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. Why? Because he was God’s holy one.

But why did Jesus have to suffer and die. The NT gives us clear reasons for this, but, before we come to that, we need to think about what the words had to mean in this context. Did he really have to die? Didn’t he have a choice about it? Yes he did. Notice what he said in John 10:17-18:

The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.

So Jesus didn’t have to suffer and die. But before man ever sinned he voluntarily chose to do so, because he loved us. He knew that if he chose not to, there would be no hope for us. The only way to save us from the just punishment our sins deserve was to take that punishment for us by dying on the cross. So in Gethsemane he ratified the decision he had made before the world began. He knew he must suffer. He knew he must die. It was the only way that we could be saved.

It was the only way that we could be saved

Let me explain it like this. Because God loves us, he wants what's best for us.

Because he knows what's best for us he sets boundaries for our actions.

If we go beyond those boundaries, there can be serious consequences.

For example, we heard about the tragedy in Baltimore recently where a bridge collapsed.

I imagine that as soon as it happened, they erected a NO ENTRY sign to prevent traffic from crossing the bridge. If anyone ignored it the consequences could have been fatal.

It’s like that with God. NO ENTRY signs like You shall not kill…You shall not steal… You shall not commit adultery… You shall not lie are there for a good reason.

And the Bible has a word for ignoring God’s NO ENTRY signs. It calls it sin.

And if we disobey those signs, there’s a price to pay.

And the Bible is clear that this applies to all of us:

All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23).

There is no one who does not sin (1 Kings 8:46).

If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves (1 John 1:8).

And the Bible warns us of the seriousness of sin. Sin separates us from God.

Our sins have hidden his face from us (Isaiah 59:2)

And unless our sins are dealt with, our separation from God will be eternal.

Jesus himself talked eternal punishment (Matthew 25:46).

Paul tells us that the price we pay for our sin is death (Romans 6:23)

So sin is serious. It separates from God. And there is nothing we can do about it.

We cannot hide it, for our sin will find us out (Numbers 32:23).

We cannot cleanse ourselves from it.

Turning over a new leaf today won’t eradicate yesterday’s sin.

No one can be righteous in God’s sight by keeping the law (Romans 3:20, Galatians 2:16).

We have all sinned. We are all separated from God. There is nothing we can do. We all need a Saviour.

And this is why Christ died.

He is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29).

He died on the cross to reconcile us sinners to God (Colossians 1:20).

He did this by offering himself as a sacrifice to God (Ephesians 5:2).

He died in our place. Because of our sin, we should die. Instead, Christ has died for us.

He took the punishment for us. He was wounded for our transgressions (Isaiah 53:5).

He suffered for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring us to God (1 Peter 3:18).

We deserved to die because of our sin, but because he loved us, he came and died in our place, so that we could live.

So why did Jesus have to suffer and die? So that we could be saved.

But what must we do?

You must be born again

Listen to what Jesus once said to a very religious man called Nicodemus:

I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again… You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'

Of course, Jesus was not talking about physical birth. He was talking about a spiritual birth where God so completely changes us that we become a new person. This happens when we repent of our sin and trust Jesus for forgiveness, relying on the fact that he has already taken the punishment for us when he died on the cross. The Bible also calls this being saved and it’s important because it’s the only way to get to Heaven. Jesus said,

I am the way… no one comes to the Father except by me (John 14:6).

And Peter said

Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12).

And that’s why the gospel must be preached.

The gospel must be preached

Mark 4:43

But he said, "I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God …because that is why I was sent."

John 9:4

As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work.

Mark 13:10

And the gospel must first be preached to all nations.

And finally, in 1 Corinthians 15 we find two more MUSTs.

1 Corinthians 15:22-25

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

1 Corinthians 15: 50-53

I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."

Your immortality is as certain as his reign!

View Details

Talk 24 Mark 8:22-26 The Healing of a Blind Man at Bethsaida

Welcome to Talk 24 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 8:22-26 where Jesus heals a blind man at Bethsaida. Jesus healed many blind people during the course of his ministry. Luke 7:21 tells us that he gave sight to many that were blind and the healings of Bartimaeus in Mark 10 and of the man born blind in John 9 are well known examples. But this incident, which is found only in Mark’s Gospel, is particularly interesting because it’s the only occasion where Jesus needed to lay his hands on someone twice before they were completely healed. So let’s begin by reading the passage together.

22 They came to Bethsaida, and some people brought a blind man and begged Jesus to touch him. 23 He took the blind man by the hand and led him outside the village. When he had spat on the man's eyes and put his hands on him, Jesus asked, "Do you see anything?" 24 He looked up and said, "I see people; they look like trees walking around." 25 Once more Jesus put his hands on the man's eyes. Then his eyes were opened, his sight was restored, and he saw everything clearly. 26 Jesus sent him home, saying, "Don't go into the village."

The first thing I’d like you to notice in this story is that some people brought a blind man and begged Jesus to touch him. Of course, it’s understandable that a blind man would need others to bring him to Jesus, but what’s most significant here is that it is the people, not the blind man, who beg Jesus to touch him. This is quite different from the healing of Bartimaeus who is discouraged by the people as he seeks healing from Jesus and who calls out, Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me, and to whom Jesus says, Your faith has healed you (Mark 10:46-52).

In fact Jesus uses this expression on several different occasions in the Gospels:

· After giving sight to Bartimaeus (Mark 10:52)

· When speaking to the woman who touched the hem of his garment (Matthew 9:22, Mark 5:34, Luke 18:42)

· to the grateful leper he had cleansed (Luke 17:19).

· and to the woman who poured perfume on his feet and received forgiveness for her sins (Luke 7:50)

It’s exactly the same Greek expression on all these occasions, and it shows the important role personal faith plays in receiving forgiveness and cleansing and healing. But there are other occasions in the New Testament where it’s the faith of other people that brings about the healing:

· The faith of the four friends who brought the paralytic to Jesus (Mark 2:5)

· of the Centurion for his servant’s healing (Matthew 8:10)

· of the SyroPhoenician woman for the healing of her daughter (Matthew 15:28)

· and the faith of the elders when anointing the sick with oil (James 5:15).

And here in today’s passage it’s the people who bring the blind man to Jesus who are begging him to heal him. It’s by no means clear how much faith the blind man had, but it seems safe to assume that he was in full agreement with his friends’ request.

The second thing we notice in this story is that Jesus took the blind man by the hand and led him outside the village (v23). We’re not told why Jesus did this, but it reminds us of the deaf and mute man that Jesus healed in the last chapter. Jesus took him aside away from the crowd (Mark 7:33). We suggested there that he may have done so because he wanted to get the man’s full attention, to show him that he was not just one of the crowd, but an individual he cared about personally, or that perhaps Jesus himself felt the need to get away from the crowd, to get a moment of quiet when he could hear what God was saying about how to deal with this man’s need.

And on this occasion Jesus may have done so for similar reasons. However, in this case it seems that Jesus might have had a further reason for taking the man out of the village. Notice that, after he has healed him, Jesus says, Don't go into the village. We have seen on several other occasions in Mark’s Gospel how Jesus tells those he has healed to tell no one about it, and it’s possible that this is just another such occasion. Jesus was concerned that his miracles

should not be the focus of people’s attention. They were signs to confirm the truth of his message. He wanted people to hear what he said, not just to see what he did.

But the fact is, we simply don’t know why he led the blind man out of the village. What we do know is that Jesus only did what he saw his Father doing (John 5:19) and the reasons for Jesus’ specific actions were related to what God was telling him to do, and to the individual needs of the person he was ministering to – a principle we should all be aware of when we are praying for the sick, and which is particularly relevant to the next thing Mark tells us:

When he had spat on the man's eyes and put his hands on him, Jesus asked, "Do you see anything?"

We’re not surprised that Jesus put his hands on him, but spitting on the man’s eyes is not what we might have expected. Of course, we remember how, when he healed the man who was deaf and mute, Mark tells as that Jesus spat and put his fingers in the man’s ears. We may also remember how, when he healed the blind man in John 9, Jesus spat on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man's eyes (v6).

There were no doubt specific reasons why Jesus used saliva in each of these three cases – one suggestion, for example, is that the man in John 9 was born without eyes and that Jesus was creating eyes for him from the dust of the ground, as God did when he created Adam. But, in the absence of any clear explanation in the Scripture, it would be unwise to jump to conclusions. It’s all right to suggest what the reasons might have been but beware of people who are over dogmatic on such matters.

As far as following the example of Jesus is concerned, we can learn from this that the Holy Spirit might lead us on rare occasions to do something out of the ordinary when ministering to the sick, but we need to be very sure that we are hearing God correctly, and we should remember that the New Testament authorises two main ways of ministering healing, the laying on of hands (Mark 16) and anointing with oil (James 5). But even with these, the important thing is to hear what God is saying. The New Testament offers no formula for healing.

Notice next, still in verse 23, that Jesus asks the man, Do you see anything? There is, of course, a simple explanation for this. It’s not immediately obvious to anyone except the blind person who has been prayed for (or treated medically for an eye condition) whether or not they can see. We have to ask them. But surely Jesus would have known. He was God, wasn’t he? Yes, but he was also man.

This simple question to a blind man reveals one of the great mysteries of the incarnation (cf. 1 Timothy 3:16). Jesus was both God and man. Not half God and half man, but 100% God and 100% man. Our finite minds simply can’t grasp it. But a God who can be fully understood by my tiny mind couldn’t possibly be God at all, could he? But the Bible is clear that while Jesus was here on earth, as man he did not know everything. He grew in wisdom and stature (Luke 2:52). Even though he never ceased to be God, when he was hungry and saw a fig tree he had to go and find out if it had any fruit (Mark 11:13).

So, here, to find out if the blind man can see anything, he asks him. There’s no need to look any further for an explanation. Neither do we need an explanation for how a blind man knew what people and trees looked like. After all, we’re not told that he was blind from birth. But what does require an explanation is why the man is not completely healed immediately. Why did Jesus need to lay hands on him twice?

Answers to this seem to fall into three main categories:

· Jesus was aware that the man was lacking in faith

· Jesus was teaching his disciples that some healings would not be instantaneous

· Jesus was illustrating his attempts to get his disciples to ‘see’ the truth about him.

Let’s consider each of these ideas in turn.

Jesus was aware that the man was lacking in faith

As we saw earlier, Jesus was constantly looking for faith in those who came to him. Sometimes it was the faith of the person who was in need. At others it was the faith of the friends or relatives who asked Jesus to help them. Whichever it was, it seems that it was the person who was bringing the request who was expected to have faith that it would be granted.

Now if this man was lacking in faith, we are certainly not told that he was. What’s more, it was the people who brought him to Jesus who made the request. And there is no mention of a sudden increase in faith before Jesus laid his hands on the man the second time, although we can imagine that his faith was encouraged by the improvement he experienced after Jesus laid hands on him the first time. However, we cannot say with any certainty that the reason why the man’s healing was not immediate was lack of faith.

Jesus was teaching his disciples that some healings would not be instantaneous

I suspect that this idea comes from the fact that healings today are often either partial or gradual. Of course we do see immediate answers to prayer for healing, especially in an evangelistic context when a miracle of healing is granted to help people come to faith in Christ (cf. Mark 16:15ff., John 20:30-31 etc.). But there are many cases where people ‘receive a touch’ of healing but are not completely healed. At other times, even when there is a full recovery, this may take some time before it is complete. And in attempting to explain the reason for these incomplete healings, it’s easy to refer to this passage as biblical evidence.

However, it’s surely clear that, in the case we are looking at, if the blind man’s healing was delayed, it was not delayed for very long! And it could hardly be described as gradual. Jesus lays hands on him, and there’s an immediate improvement. He lays hands on him again, and the healing is complete. If Jesus really wanted to show his disciples that some healings are not instantaneous, this was hardly the best example give them. Furthermore, there is no evidence of gradual or partial healings in the ministry of his disciples. That is not to say that healing does not sometimes happen gradually or in stages – there’s plenty of evidence that it does. But I think it unlikely that this was the reason that Jesus laid hands on this man twice.

Jesus was illustrating his attempts to get his disciples to ‘see’ the truth about him

The merit in this suggestion is that it takes into account the context in which the story is set in Mark’s Gospel. As we saw in our last talk, Jesus was often disappointed with his disciples for their lack of faith and slowness to understand, and only a few verses before today’s passage we hear him saying:

Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don't you remember?

The disciples had physical eyes to see, but they were spiritually blind. But Jesus did not give up on them. He persevered with them. And it’s possible that Mark included this story at this point in his narrative as an illustration of Jesus’ determination to persevere with his disciples until their spiritual eyes were opened to see who he truly was.

And this makes all the more sense when we consider what follows. Jesus takes his disciples to Caesarea Philippi and asks his disciples who they think he is. And Peter replies, You are the Christ. His eyes have been opened, but not to the whole truth, for when Jesus tells them about his coming death and resurrection, Peter refuses to accept it. His eyes has been opened to part of the truth, but he had yet to see clearly the whole truth.

I confess I find this explanation very appealing because of the context in which the passage is set. However, if Mark does include the story here as a kind of living parable illustrating how Jesus will persevere with people until they come to see the truth about him, that need not necessarily mean that this was why Jesus did it in the first place. The simple fact is, we simply do not know why Jesus healed this man in this way. The evidence for all these suggestions is inconclusive. And whatever explanation we prefer, we must be careful not to be dogmatic. What we can say with certainty is that Jesus did not leave this man unhealed.

So what other lessons can we learn from this passage?

We see that:

Nothing is impossible with God

He responds to our prayers

We may not understand why he answers in the way he does

What he does he does perfectly

He keeps on working in us until we see everything (including Jesus) clearly.

Once he could see clearly, the first thing this man saw was Jesus.

One day we will see clearly. Now we see through a glass darkly, but then (when we get to Heaven) we will see face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12).

Only a day before making this recording my darling wife Eileen went to be with Jesus.

Now she sees him perfectly. Oh hallelujah. Thank you Jesus. And one day we shall too.

View Details

Talk 23 Mark 8:1-21 Feeding the Four Thousand

Welcome to Talk 23 in our series on Mark's Gospel. Today we are looking at Mark 8:1-21. This passage includes the story of Jesus feeding the 4,000, which is similar in many ways to the account of the feeding of the 5,000 recorded in Chapter 6. As a result, liberal scholars have suggested that this is just a variant account of the same miracle rather than a totally separate one.

So today we’ll begin by looking at the biblical evidence that this was indeed a distinct event which took place at a different time, in a different place, and with a different group of people. We’ll then consider what lessons we can learn from the passage with regard to Jesus, his opponents and his disciples. So let’s begin by reading Mark 8:1-21.

During those days another large crowd gathered. Since they had nothing to eat, Jesus called his disciples to him and said, 2 "I have compassion for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. 3 If I send them home hungry, they will collapse on the way, because some of them have come a long distance." 4 His disciples answered, "But where in this remote place can anyone get enough bread to feed them?" 5 "How many loaves do you have?" Jesus asked. "Seven," they replied. 6 He told the crowd to sit down on the ground. When he had taken the seven loaves and given thanks, he broke them and gave them to his disciples to set before the people, and they did so. 7 They had a few small fish as well; he gave thanks for them also and told the disciples to distribute them. 8 The people ate and were satisfied. Afterward the disciples picked up seven basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. 9 About four thousand men were present. And having sent them away, 10 he got into the boat with his disciples and went to the region of Dalmanutha.

11 The Pharisees came and began to question Jesus. To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. 12 He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it." 13 Then he left them, got back into the boat and crossed to the other side.

14 The disciples had forgotten to bring bread, except for one loaf they had with them in the boat. 15 "Be careful," Jesus warned them. "Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod." 16 They discussed this with one another and said, "It is because we have no bread." 17 Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked them: "Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? 18 Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don't you remember? 19 When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?" "Twelve," they replied. 20 "And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?" They answered, "Seven." 21 He said to them, "Do you still not understand?"

So, to begin with, what’s the evidence that this is not a variant account of the same miracle as the feeding of the 5,000 recorded in Chapter 6?

Why this is not a variant account of the feeding of the 5,000

We need not spend much time on this. If you take seriously the authority of the Scriptures, you will quickly see that this is a completely different miracle from the feeding of the 5000. Firstly, both Matthew and Mark record them closely together as two separate accounts of two separate miracles. Secondly, despite the similarities, there are also many differences in the details of the two accounts. Thirdly, the two miracles took place in different places and with different people. The feeding of the 5000 took place in the largely Jewish region of Galilee. The feeding of the four thousand was in the Gentile region of the Decapolis. And finally, and most important of all, Jesus himself refers to them as separate events. In verses 19-20 he says:

When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?" "Twelve," they replied. 20 "And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?"

There is no way that Jesus could have said this if the two stories were variant accounts of the same miracle. And if Jesus was able to perform such a miracle once, he was certainly able to do it twice! But that brings us to what we can learn about Jesus in this story,

Lessons about Jesus

When we looked at the feeding of the 5,000 in Talk 18 we noticed three main characteristics about Jesus:

· His compassion for the people

· His concern for his disciples as he seeks to train them to trust him

· His confidence in his heavenly Father.

And we noticed that these qualities are seen over and over again throughout his ministry. So it’s not surprising that we see them here as he feeds the 4,000. Again he has compassion on the people because they have nothing to eat (vv.2-3). Again we see his concern for the weakness of his disciples’ faith and their lack of understanding (vv.4, 17-18, 21). And again we see his confidence in God as he gives thanks for the few loaves and fishes he has (vv.6-7) and feeds a multitude with them. But perhaps there’s just one more thing we can learn about Jesus from this passage. The repetition of such a miracle shows us that if Jesus has done something once, he can do it again. And if he could do it again then, he can do the same kind of thing again today.

Lessons about his opponents

The Pharisees are mentioned in verses 11 and 13. In verse 11 they come to test Jesus and ask for a sign from heaven, to which Jesus replies

Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it (v.12).

And in verse 15 Jesus warns his disciples

Be careful…Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod.

Two questions arise from these verses:

Why does Jesus refuse to give his opponents the sign they are asking for?

2. Why does he warn his disciples to watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees?

Why does Jesus refuse to give his opponents the sign they are asking for?

First, it’s worth noting the significance of the particular wording Jesus uses here. Although it’s not clear in our English translations, his hearers would have understood him as taking an oath. So his refusal to give them a sign was extremely strong. He was determined not to take a course of action that he had already firmly rejected when Satan had tempted him to throw himself down from the highest point of the temple (Matthew 4:5-6).

Secondly, please note that his refusal is recorded in all four Gospels. In Matthew 12:39, for example, Jesus also says that a wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign and goes on to say that the only sign that would be given it would be the sign of his resurrection from the dead (cf. Luke 11:29-32). And he knew that even then, despite the clear evidence for his resurrection, they, like many today, would still refuse to believe. Notice what he says in Luke 16:31 when talking about rich man and Lazarus:

If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.

By mentioning Moses and the Prophets Jesus was referring to the Old Testament, the only Bible they had at the time. If people are determined to reject the testimony of Scripture, they will also reject the evidence for the resurrection. God does not work miracles in an attempt to convince those who, in their hearts, really do not want to believe, those who, like the Pharisees, only wanted to test him.

He does, however, work miracles to help those whose hearts are open to his word. John’s Gospel records seven signs to enable people to believe and in chapter 20 it says that

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (vv30-31).

It’s by believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, that we have eternal life. And miraculous signs are given to help us to believe. So when Jesus sent his disciples into all the world to preach the gospel, he promised them that signs would accompany their preaching (Mark 16:15-20). But, as may become clearer as we answer our second question, he does not work miracles for those who, like the Pharisees, have no intention of believing him.

Why does Jesus warn his disciples to watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees?

v. 15 Be careful…Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod.

Yeast, or leaven, is what is needed to make bread rise. You only need a small amount and it will soon spread throughout the dough. In the New Testament, with only one exception (Matthew 13:33), yeast is used to symbolize evil. It’s an unseen influence that can spread quickly in any society or church. In 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 Paul says:

Don't you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch – as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Here Paul was referring to the Jewish custom of clearing the house of yeast before Passover. He sees the church as an unleavened batch of dough because Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed for us. We are unleavened. Sin has been cleared out because of what Jesus did for us. So we are told to be what Christ has already made us. In effect he is saying, Christ has made you holy, so BE holy. Live holy unleavened lives. And he uses malice and wickedness as examples of leaven or yeast, and sincerity and truth as examples of unleavened bread.

So if yeast represents something bad, what exactly does Jesus mean when he talks about the yeast of the Pharisees and of Herod? The answer surely lies in what we have already seen about their attitude to Jesus. We saw in Talk 17 (Mark 6) how Herod:

· Hardened his heart to God’s word through the preaching of John the Baptist

· Refused to repent (of his adulterous relationship with Herodias)

· Insisted on preserving his reputation at all costs

· Was eventually complicit with Pontius Pilate in the crucifixion of Jesus (Cf. Acts 4:27).

And we have repeatedly seen how the Pharisees too persistently hardened their hearts against Jesus, even accusing him of being demon-possessed. Their reputation and social position were more important to them than the truth, and they were already seeking a way to kill him. Their words and their actions against him were expressions of what was already in their hearts. The ‘yeast’ of the Pharisees was essentially an attitude of heart that is persistently opposed to Christ.

And there are two possible reasons why Jesus warns his disciples to guard against this yeast. He knew that the attitude of the Pharisees and Herod (or Herodians) would eventually spread like yeast to make the entire population rise up against Jesus and he wanted his disciples to be aware of this. But it’s more likely in my view that he was warning them of the danger of allowing such an attitude to develop in their own hearts. Paul was later to warn the Corinthians that a little yeast leavens the whole lump. A wrong attitude of heart among Christians can spread very quickly in a local church and we must be careful not to allow our thinking to become like that of the world (Romans 12:2).

Lessons about his disciples

But that brings us finally to what we can learn about the disciples from this passage. In verse 4 they’re still asking the same kind of question as they did before the feeding of the five thousand: But where in this remote place can anyone get enough bread to feed them? They were still thinking at a purely human level, and even after Jesus has worked a similar miracle again, he has to say to them:

17 Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? 18 Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don't you remember? 19 When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?" "Twelve," they replied. 20 "And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?" They answered, "Seven." 21 He said to them, "Do you still not understand?"

They had failed to understand. They had failed to see and hear. They had failed to remember. But before we get too critical of these men, we need to examine our own hearts and ask if we are still prone to the same hardness of heart. The disciples had failed understand:

· Who Jesus really is

· Why his resources were not limited to the natural

· Why they themselves need not be limited to their own natural resources.

They had eyes to see and ears to hear, but they were blind to what God wanted to show them and deaf to what he wanted to tell them. Are we so very different? I think not.

So what’s the cure? The key is in that word remember. We need to remember what God has said to us in his word. We need to remember what we have seen him do already in our own lives. And, most important of all, we need to remember who Jesus is. As we take our eyes off the problems that face us and our limited resources to solve them, and remind ourselves of who Jesus is, and the infinite resources at his disposal, we will learn, as the disciples eventually came to learn, that nothing is impossible to those who believe.

View Details

Talk 22 Mark 7:31-37 Jesus heals a man who is deaf and mute

Welcome to Talk 22 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at the story in Mark 7:31-37 of how Jesus heals a man who is deaf and mute. But before we turn to the passage, let me begin with a testimony of a similar healing that happened in my own family.

From my earliest years I can remember being told of how one of my aunts had been miraculously healed in answer to prayer . Her name was May and in the 1911 census she was recorded as being ‘deaf and dumb from birth’. When she was in her twenties, my grandmother took her to a divine healing meeting conducted by the evangelist, George Jeffreys , who placed his hands on her and prayed for her.

That evening, as they were travelling home to Poplar in the East End of London, they went down to catch the underground train. While they were waiting on the platform, suddenly, with a shocked expression on her face, May put both hands over her ears. She could hear the roar of the train as it came through the tunnel approaching the platform!

Until that moment, from the day she was born she had never been able to hear, but now she could hear, and within a few weeks was beginning to speak. My father was her younger brother, and when, years later, I was told at school that miracles did not happen, he was quick to remind me of my aunt’s healing. I suppose that’s why I’ve never doubted God ’s miracle working power and firmly believe that we should expect to see miracles today. But now, to the passage in Mark 7.

31 Then Jesus left the vicinity of Tyre and went through Sidon, down to the Sea of Galilee and into the region of the Decapolis. 32 There some people brought to him a man who was deaf and could hardly talk, and they begged him to place his hand on the man.

33 After he took him aside, away from the crowd, Jesus put his fingers into the man's ears. Then he spat and touched the man's tongue. 34 He looked up to heaven and with a deep sigh said to him, "Ephphatha!" (which means, "Be opened!"). 35 At this, the man's ears were opened, his tongue was loosened and he began to speak plainly.

36 Jesus commanded them not to tell anyone. But the more he did so, the more they kept talking about it. 37 People were overwhelmed with amazement. "He has done everything well," they said. "He even makes the deaf hear and the mute speak."

This miracle is recorded only in Mark. It’s the simple but wonderful story of a man’s need and how Jesus met it. Jesus leaves the region of Tyre and Sidon and goes down to the region of the Ten Cities known as Decapolis. Some people bring him a man who is deaf and can hardly talk. There is no mention of faith in this story, but, as we saw last time, faith comes by hearing the message about Christ. How much these people were able to communicate with this deaf man is not clear, but they themselves had heard about Christ and had enough faith to bring him to Jesus. It’s interesting that in the New Testament it is often the faith of others that results in healing, and not always the faith of the person who is sick. Note too that they don’t specifically ask Jesus to heal the man, but just to place his hand on him.

But let’s look carefully at what Jesus actually does. The first thing we notice is that he took him aside away from the crowd.

He took him aside away from the crowd.

Why did Jesus do this? We’re not told. It can be great to be part of a crowd, especially where miracles are happening, but sometimes the crowd can be a distraction. The miracles Jesus is performing on others can in certain circumstances take our eyes off what he might want to do for us. Jesus deals with us as individuals. And in this case he wants to get the man’s full attention, to show him that he is not just one of the crowd, but an individual he cares about personally. Perhaps the man’s condition, unable to hear and hardly able to speak, made these personal moments with Jesus all the more necessary.

And perhaps Jesus himself felt the need to get away from the crowd, to get a moment of quiet when he can hear what Father is saying about how to deal with this man’s need. When ministering to the sick it’s so important to take time to hear what God is saying in each individual situation, and not be rushed into trying to deal with the needs of everyone who is asking for prayer at the same time.

He put his fingers into the man’s ears. Then he spat and touched the man’s tongue.

Jesus usually healed by a touch or a word of command, and his disciples sometimes healed by anointing people with oil. On one occasion he even healed a blind man by anointing his eyes with mud made from the dust of the ground and Jesus’ own saliva (John 9:6). But occasions like this, and the one we are considering in today’s passage, were exceptional, and should certainly not be seen as a methodology of healing. Jesus’ only methodology was to hear what the Father was saying (John 5:19.)

So why does Jesus on this occasion put his fingers into the man’s ears, spit and touch the man’s tongue. It’s possible that he was miming. The people who had brought the man to Jesus had shown a measure of faith just by bringing him, but it’s possible that Jesus was also looking for faith in the man himself. And, as we have seen, faith comes by hearing… But the man could not hear. But by miming Jesus could well have been indicating to the man that he was intending to heal him, and the assurance that would give the man would create faith in his heart.

But another aspect of Jesus’ unusual actions is how personal and intimate they are. He is not just touching the man; he’s putting his fingers into his ears. He’s spitting and touching the man’s tongue, presumably with the saliva! Today we might say, He’s invading his space! But if we want God’s blessing in our lives, we must be prepared to let him invade our space. We must make room for him.

When he left heaven and came to earth he was, in a sense, invading our space, but he only did so because he loves us. And he’s constantly looking for that intimate relationship with us where he’s involved with every aspect of our being. If we allow him to do so, the reward, as it was for the man in our story, will be wonderful.

He looked up to heaven

Jesus often looked up to heaven when he prayed. He did so before he blessed the loaves and fed the five thousand (Mark 6:41). And the fact that he does so here suggests three things. First, Jesus had constant contact with heaven. He was sinless. There was no barrier between himself and God. At his baptism the heavens were torn open and the Father’s voice was heard saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased (Mark 1:10-11). Jesus lived under an open Heaven.

Secondly, by looking up to Heaven Jesus would be reminded of what Heaven is like. In Heaven there is no sin, no suffering, no sickness. He taught his disciples to pray, Your will be done as it is in heaven… God’s will is that earth should be like Heaven. And Jesus had come to do God’s will (Hebrews 10:7). Jesus knew that in the age to come earth would indeed become like Heaven and he had come to show us by his sinless life, his love and compassion, and by the miracles he performed, what a foretaste of Heaven could be like.

And thirdly, looking up to Heaven was a sign of his submission to heaven’s authority. As we have already said, Jesus only did what he saw the Father do (John 5:19). He looks up to Heaven in submission to Father’s authority before he speaks the word of command – be opened. And we should never presume to speak a word of command in Jesus’ name without first receiving by the Spirit authority to do so from Heaven. We can not take authority. We only have it if it is given to us.

He sighed deeply

It’s been suggested that Jesus’ sigh reflects the cost and pain of ministry. And Jesus certainly did pay a heavy price, not just by his death on the cross to save us from our sins, but even through the years of preaching, teaching, healing, and training his disciples, he warned those who thought that following him might be easy, that Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head (Matthew 8:20).

But I think it more likely that Jesus’ sigh was an expression of his compassion for the suffering. Jesus’ compassion was the motivation for his healings. In Matthew 14:14 we’re told that he healed their sick because he was moved with compassion for them. It was because of his compassion that he gave sight to the blind (Matthew 20:34), cleansed the leper (Mark 1:41), cast out demons (Mark 5:19), and raised the dead (Luke 7:13).

It is also possible to see his sigh as an expression of anger with this man’s affliction. Does not God, who is holy, have a right to be angry with sin? Yes, but his anger with sin springs not only from his holiness, but also from his love. He hates sin because he knows what it does to our lives. He hates sin because he loves us. And he hates sickness because of the havoc it wreaks in human lives. It’s because of his compassion for this man that he is angry with the affliction that bound him, and no doubt with any Satanic forces that may have caused it.

So Jesus looks up to Heaven and sighs, and then he says, Ephphatha, BE OPENED.

He said to him, Ephphatha… BE OPENED

Just one word – Ephphatha. One word from Jesus is enough. It was enough because it had all the authority of Heaven behind it. Jesus only did what he saw the Father do. He who said at the beginning, Let there be light, now says, Be opened. Now notice what it says in verse 35:

35 At this, the man's ears were opened, his tongue was loosened, and he began to speak plainly.

Th word translated at this literally means immediately! Immediately he could hear. Immediately he could speak – plainly. No wonder the crowd said, He has done everything well (v37). And, as my aunt’s testimony shows, the age of such miracles is not past, though admittedly she did not speak immediately she was healed. I think that perhaps her inability to speak had been caused by her being deaf. Once the Lord opened her ears she was able to begin to learn to speak. But this man began to speak plainly immediately. My aunt’s experience does not in any way suggest that miracles today cannot be as great as Jesus performed while he was here on earth. Did not he say,

I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father (John 14:12)?

No, my aunt’s experience simply shows that God deals with different people differently. What doesn’t change is his love, his compassion, and his power. But is there perhaps also a spiritual message in this miracle that applies to us all? Look at verses 36-37.

When we met Jesus our ears were opened to his word and our tongues were loosened to speak it out. Have we begun to speak plainly to others about him? Are they overwhelmed with amazement? Does our testimony about Jesus cause them to say, He has done everything well? Do they keep talking about it?

But finally, let’s remind ourselves that Jesus opens more than ears, and mouths, and eyes. He opens the door to Heaven to all who will believe. There was no other good enough to pay the price of sin, He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in (C.F Alexander). He is the one who opens and no-one can shut (Revelation 3:7). He alone can open the book (Revelation 5:7). And in John 5:28 Jesus tells us that a time is coming when the graves will be opened and

all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out – those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned.

And Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 that

the Lord himself will come down from Heaven with a loud command (a shout) with the voice of the archangel and the trumpet call of God and the dead in Christ shall rise…

I wonder what that shout might be. Could it be Ephphatha?

View Details

Talk 21 Mark 7:24-40 The Faith of a Syrophoenician Woman

Welcome to Talk 21 in our series on Mark's gospel. Today we will be considering Mark 7:24-40 where Jesus casts a demon out of the daughter of a Syrophoenician woman. In recent talks we have seen how Jesus often tested the faith of his disciples, and today we will see him testing the faith of a Gentile.

The story is also recorded in Matthew 15:21-28 where Matthew adds some details that are not mentioned in Mark’s account. So, as I read the passage in Mark, I’m going to weave into it the extra details we find in Matthew. (If you’re looking at the notes the words in brackets are from Matthew).

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre (and Sidon). He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an evil spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was (a Canaanite) a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter (crying out, ‘Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me. My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession’. Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us." He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said). 27 "First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs." 28 "Yes, Lord," she replied, "but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs (that fall from their master’s table)." 29 Then he told her, (Woman, you have great faith. Your request is granted). For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter. (And her daughter was healed at that moment). 30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

Jesus travels about 30 miles from the shore of the sea of Galilee to Tyre and Sidon which were Canaanite cities on the Mediterranean Sea just north of Israel. He must have been known at least to the Jews living in that area and was probably staying in the home of a Jewish disciple.

Mark tells us that he didn’t want anyone to know he was there. We’re not told why, but it was almost certainly so that he could take time to rest and to pray. But it wasn't long before the news got out about his presence in that territory and a woman whose little daughter was demon possessed came begging him for help. From all we have learnt about Jesus so far, we can have no doubt that he had compassion on this woman, but on this occasion he did not respond immediately to meet her need.

There are two possible reasons for this:

· She was not a Jew

· He was testing her faith

She was not a Jew.

Jesus says that he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel, and adds,

First let the children eat all they want, for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs.

The woman would have understood what Jesus meant by this because the Jews frequently referred to the Gentiles as dogs.

At first sight it seems that Jesus is dealing with this woman very harshly, but we need to remember when he said it. God’s ultimate purpose was that the good news of the kingdom would be preached to all nations, but that was to take place after Jesus’ death and resurrection.

Paul tells us in Ephesians 2 that by his death Jesus broke down the wall of the temple that separated the Jews from the Gentiles, but during his earthly ministry Jesus’ purpose was first to give an opportunity to the Jews – the lost sheep of Israel – to repent and believe. But that did not mean that even then the blessings of his kingdom were completely unavailable to the Gentiles, if only they would believe. The true Jew, the true descendant of Abraham, has always been the person who believes as Abraham believed. Because of her faith this Gentile woman not only received healing for her daughter, but also became one of God’s children. But that brings us to the second reason why Jesus did not immediately grant her request.

He was testing her faith.

The fact that God sometimes tests us does not mean that he does not love us, but by being tested our faith is strengthened. Reading the passage, we see various facets of this woman’s amazing faith that provide important lessons for us today.

1 She heard about him

In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an evil spirit came and fell at his feet (v25).

How had she heard and what had she heard? We don’t know. But Mark 3:8-12 might give us a clue:

When they heard all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon. Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him. For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him. Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, "You are the Son of God."

She had almost certainly heard about the healings and the exorcisms. Why else would she come to Jesus to ask him to help her demon-possessed daughter? Her faith came by hearing the message about Christ (cf. Romans 10:17). The more we learn from God’s word about who Jesus is and what he did, and the more we learn of what he is still doing today, the greater will be our faith. And if we want others to come to faith in Jesus, we must tell them about him.

2 She acknowledged who he was

She cried out, Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me (Matthew 15:22). Admittedly, the Greek word kurios could be used then, as it still is in Greece today, as a polite form of address, rather equivalent to Mr. or Sir. But the use of the Messianic title Son of David surely implies that here it means something more. She certainly seems to have had an understanding of Jesus’ authority, rather like another Gentile, the Roman centurion, who came to Jesus for help, believing that Jesus could heal at a distance, and of whom Jesus said, I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith (Matthew 8:10).

So faith begins as a result of hearing about Jesus and coming to recognise who he is. When we do, the appropriate response is to humble ourselves. God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble.

3 She humbled herself

· She fell at his feet (v25)

· She begged Jesus to drive out the demon (v26)

· She recognised her need for mercy (Matthew 15:22)

· She came and knelt before (worshipped) him (Matthew 15:25)

· She admitted that she needed help (Matthew 15:25)

· She acknowledged that she was not one of God’s children (vv27-28)

But despite all this she boldly persisted.

4 She boldly persisted

Notice that she begged Jesus.

The word used for begged here means that she kept on asking.

But Jesus doesn’t reply.

The disciples urge him to send her away because she keeps crying out after us.

Now Jesus speaks. I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.

Undeterred she comes and kneels before him and says, Lord, help me!

Jesus responds by saying that his first responsibility is to the Jews.

But she still persists. Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs.

To which Jesus replied, Woman, you have great faith. Your request is granted.

Sometimes faith is rewarded immediately. Often it’s demonstrated by a dogged persistence that is determined to believe despite adversity and disappointment.

5 She believed

Why did Jesus tell her that she had great faith?

· She believed that Jesus had the power to deal with an impossible situation.

· She believed that he could do it at a distance. (She wouldn’t have expected him to come to her house).

· She believed because her eyes were on Jesus, not on her ethnicity or inadequacy.

· She kept on believing despite Jesus’ initial silence and apparent denial.

· She declared her faith.

6 She declared her faith

In verse 27 Jesus says:

First let the children eat all they want, for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs.

The word used for dogs here means little dogs and refers to family pets. It’s possible that what Jesus meant by this was that his first priority was to provide food for the children (teach his disciples), and not to allow pets to interrupt the family meal. But, as I have already mentioned, the Jews commonly referred to Gentiles as dogs. So there is also the implication that the time for the Gentiles had not yet arrived. Despite this, however, the woman replies:

Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs (that fall from their master’s table).

And it’s at this point that Jesus says:

Woman, you have great faith. Your request is granted. For such a reply, (literally, because of this word), you may go; the demon has left your daughter.

Notice that it’s because of her reply that Jesus says she has great faith. He clearly sees this as a declaration of faith. And the declaration of faith is important. In 2 Corinthains 4:13 Paul says:

It is written: ‘I believed; therefore I have spoken’. Since we have the same spirit of faith, we believe and therefore speak.

And in Romans 10:10 he says that it’s with our mouth that we profess our faith. But this is no ‘Name it and Claim it’ teaching. He does not say, I spoke, therefore I believed! He simply means that if we really believe something in our hearts we will declare it. On another occasion Jesus said, Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matthew 12:34). Jesus saw the woman’s declaration as evidence of the faith that was in her heart, and that was enough for him to grant her request.

7 She received what she asked for

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

She received a foretaste of the blessings that would soon become available to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. And we too have received a foretaste of future blessings. In the gift of the Holy Spirit we have tasted of the powers of the age to come (Hebrews 6:4-5). For example, the ultimate healing takes place when we receive new bodies when Jesus comes again, but by the Spirit through the gifts of healing, which are distributed as he determines, we may receive by faith a wonderful foretaste of the age to come.

So, to conclude, if Jesus is testing your faith right now, remind yourself who he is, keep your eyes on him and not on the problem, humble yourself before him, persist in asking him to help you, and decare your faith in him. And at the right time, he will do it.

View Details

Talk 20 Mark 7:1-23 Beware of the Pharisees

Welcome to Talk 20 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 7:1-23 where the Pharisees see some of Jesus’ disciples eating food without first giving their hands the ceremonial washing that was required by Jewish tradition. So they ask Jesus about this. Jesus replies by quoting a passage from Isaiah where God says:

These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.

They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.

He then adds:

You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.

As an example of this, Jesus points out that they were getting around God’s command to honour your father and mother by a practice known as Corban. Instead of helping their parents when they were in financial need, they would say that whatever money they had was devoted to God, and so they were unable to help them. In doing this they were setting aside the commands of God in order to observe their own traditions!

Jesus then calls the crowd to him and tells them that

Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.'

When his disciples ask him to explain what he means by this, he tells them that what we eat or how we eat it can’t make us unclean because it doesn’t go into our heart but into our stomach and then passes out of our body. Mark then adds that

In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."

Jesus then says that what makes you unclean is what comes out of your heart – things like evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. These are the things that make us unclean.

So what can we learn from all this?

Notice first the continued opposition of the Jewish leaders to Jesus.

The continued opposition of the Jewish leaders to Jesus

They seem to have been against him right from the start. They have challenged his authority to forgive sins, they’ve criticised him for eating with tax-collectors and ‘sinners’, they’ve complained that his disciples have done what is not lawful on the Sabbath, they’ve accused him of being demon-possessed, and they’ve already begun to plot how they can kill him. And now they’re complaining about the behaviour of his disciples again:

Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands? (v5).

And that was the root cause of their opposition – the tradition of the elders. There’s a clear contrast in this passage between man-made tradition and the commands of God.

The contrast between man-made tradition and the commands of God

Notice the repetition of the word tradition in this passage:

3 …the tradition of the elders.

4 …they observe many other traditions

5 …Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders…?

8 …You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.

9 …You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!

13 …you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down.

What stands out in these verses is that traditions are made by men, not God. They are handed down by men. And there is the danger that in following man-made tradition we may not only let go of the commands of God, but even nullify his word. It can also easily lead to hypocrisy.

The danger of hypocrisy

Look at verses 6-8.

6 He (Jesus) replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: "'These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 7 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.' 8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."

The word hypocrite comes from the Greek word hupokrites which means actor. In ancient Greece plays were performed in amphitheatres by actors who wore masks. So a hypocrite is someone who covers up who they really are, pretending to be someone else. This was just what the Pharisees were guilty of, honouring God with their lips, but far from him in their hearts. Their hypocrisy involved insincerity and dishonesty.

As a result, Jesus said that they worshipped God in vain. They were not honouring God by teaching his word, but rules taught by men. They knew what God had said, but they had let go of his commands. In Matthew 23, talking of the Pharisees, Jesus said:

…do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. "Everything they do is done for men to see… (Matthew 23:3-4).

In fact, to get a full understanding of Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees, it’s worth reading the whole of Matthew 23, but the verses we’ve just quoted give a clear idea of the nature of hypocrisy. Their motivation for what they did and said was clearly wrong. They did not practice what they preached, and by their nit-picking rules they placed heavy burdens on people’s shoulders and were totally unwilling to lift them. But that brings us to the next key principle we see in today’s passage – the freedom that Jesus has brought us.

The freedom that Jesus has brought us

The legalistic regulations imposed by the traditions of men stands in stark contrast to the liberty that Jesus introduced through his teaching. Notice Mark’s statement in verse 19 that Jesus declared all foods clean! (Compare Peter’s experience on the rooftop at Joppa in Acts 10). What a contrast to the strict food laws imposed by Moses! As we saw in Talk 8, the kingdom of God which Jesus had come to proclaim could not be contained within the framework of Judaism. This is reflected in what Mark says in verse 3: The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing.

Admittedly it had taken some time for the church to break free from the restraints of Judaism, but the Council of Jerusalem (c.48-50AD) was a great step forward towards the freedom that Jesus had so vehemently proclaimed. I have dealt with this subject at some length in my book, The Voice of God, where I point out that the decision made by the church leaders in Acts 15 regarding food was an ad hoc decision motivated by the Holy Spirit to deal with a specific problem facing the church at that time. It was not binding on all Christians for all time. As we have seen, Jesus had already declared all foods to be clean, and this was clearly the understanding of the apostle Paul when he says in Romans 14:17-20:

For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.

The underlying principle in this teaching is love. When a Pharisee who was an expert in the Law asked Jesus, What is the greatest commandment in the Law? Jesus replied:

'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments"(Matthew 22:37-40).

Notice that Jesus says, All the Law and the Prophets. Not just the ceremonial law. All the law. The Ten Commandments are included. And everything taught by the prophets. The entire Old Testament. As Christians we are free from it all! But of course, if we really love God with all our heart and soul and mind, and if we really love our neighbour as ourself, we will not kill or steal or commit adultery etc. The Law was given to show us our sin and our need of a Saviour (Galatians 3:23-25). But now we are free. It was for freedom that Christ has set us free and we are to stand firm in that freedom (Galatians 5:1). As Paul says in Galatians 5:13-14:

You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather serve one another humbly in love. For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself’.

The importance of the heart

In verses 18-23 he says that nothing you eat can make you unclean because it doesn’t go into your heart. It’s what what’s in your heart that makes you unclean. In Matthew 5:27-28 , for example, Jesus warns against adultery in the heart. This is because, as he says here:

…from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23 All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.'

This list is clearly connected to the Ten Commandments, where theft, murder, adultery, and coveting are strictly forbidden. But whereas the Ten Commandments relate largely to a person’s actions, Jesus is here emphasising the motivation behind those actions and the source from which they spring, the human heart. In Jeremiah 17:9-10 God says:

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it? I the Lord search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds (ESV).

The desires of our hearts influence the thoughts of our minds, and our thoughts determine our actions. But as those who have received Christ as our Saviour, Hebrews 10:19-22 tells us that we have confidence to enter God’s presence because Jesus has made a way for us by dying for us and as a result we can:

draw near to God with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience…

What’s more, Galatians 4:5-6 tells us that we have been redeemed from the law and adopted as God’s children, and God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts. That’s why, rather than giving in to the acts of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21), we are able now to follow the desires of the Spirit allowing the fruit of the Spirit to grow in our lives:

Love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23).

How different these qualities are from the attitudes and actions of the Pharisees. From their bad example there is so much we can learn to avoid. Even as Christians we can fall into their ways as even Peter did briefly (Galatians 2:11-13). As those who follow Jesus we should never:

· Put man-made traditions before the word of God.

· Find ways of getting around God's commands to further our own interests.

· Impose heavy burdens on others by our legalistic rules.

· Be more concerned with outward appearance than with true holiness.

· Act like hypocrites, honouring God with our lips, but far from him in our hearts.

And, of course, unlike the Pharisees, we must practise what we preach.

If we don’t want to fall into their ways, we need to examine our hearts.

View Details

Talk 19 Mark 6:45-56 Jesus walks on water

Welcome to talk 19 in our series on Mark's gospel. Today we are looking at Mark 6:45-56 where we read the remarkable story of Jesus walking on water.This story, which takes place just after Jesus had fed the 5000, is a wonderful example of how Jesus continues to challenge and to strengthen the faith of his disciples. In it we see how:

· The disciples were very slow to learn and to believe.

· Jesus deliberately challenges their faith.

· He supernaturally intervenes to bring them safely through the problem they are facing.

The disciples’ slowness to learn and to believe

Jesus was training his disciples to become fishers of men.

The most important part was teaching them to understand exactly who he was – the Son of God. He did this by the things he taught and the miracles he performed.

But the disciples were slow to learn and to believe.

Even after Jesus had risen from the dead he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen (Mark 16:14).

They were amazed when they saw the miracles, but again and again they reveal their lack of faith. Remember the storm on the Sea of Galilee where Jesus asks, Do you still have no faith?

And, in Chapter 8, when the disciples had forgotten to bring any bread with them, Jesus asks:

Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don’t you remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?” “Twelve,” they replied. “And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?” They answered, “Seven.” He said to them, “Do you still not understand?” (Mark 8:17-21).

It seems that Jesus was constantly working

· to bring his disciples to a deeper understanding of who he was

· and to develop their faith in God’s love for them

· and his ability and willingness to meet their needs.

And believe it or not, he’s doing the same for us too.

So let’s look at the passage in more detail,

bearing in mind that Jesus’ aim is to strengthen the faith of his disciples – and our faith too.

Jesus challenges their faith

45 Immediately Jesus made his disciples get into the boat and go on ahead of him to Bethsaida, while he dismissed the crowd. 46 After leaving them, he went up on a mountainside to pray.

Notice that Jesus made them get into the boat. The verb can be translated compel.

So he must have had a definite purpose in sending them on ahead of him and putting them at some distance from himself.

Part of that purpose was so that he could be alone and pray.

Perhaps he was talking to his Father about the disciples’ lack of faith.

And perhaps he sent them on ahead to test and strengthen their faith.

Soon they would be facing a storm without Jesus being physically present with them.

This is made clear in the next verse.

47 When evening came, the boat was in the middle of the lake and he was alone on land.

John 6 tells us that the boat was about three and a half miles from the shore.

Matthew 14 adds that it was buffeted by the waves.

The disciples are in trouble, but Jesus is alone on the land.

At least in the earlier storm he was with them in the boat, even if he was asleep!

How often when we face problems do we feel that Jesus is no longer with us, no longer aware of our need? Help seems miles away. But look at the next verse.

48 He saw the disciples straining at the oars, because the wind was against them. About the fourth watch of the night (i.e. between 3 and 6 am) he went out to them, walking on the lake. He was about to pass by them…

The disciples were having a hard time. The wind was against them.

They were straining at the oars. They were finding it difficult to cope.

But even though it was dark, Jesus saw them. He saw the problem.

And he sees us too, even when our circumstances are so dark that we cannot see him.

Jesus intervenes supernaturally

So …he went out to them, walking on the lake.

He found a way of getting to them, even though it was humanly, scientifically, impossible.

He walked on water! If he can do that, surely he can do anything.

Mind you, walking on water wasn’t his usual way of getting places. He only worked miracles when there was a need.

But why was he about to pass by them? Or he intended to pass by them.

He had come to help them, so why pass by them?

You would have expected him to go straight to them.

Was it to test their faith? To get their attention?

We don’t know, but sometimes when it seems that he’s passing us by, he’s doing it to test our faith or get our attention. Maybe he wants us to really cry out.

Note that when he hears them cry out in fear he immediately encourages them by speaking to them.

His power to answer is not limited by the way we ask for help.

Even when we cry out in fear he is there to help. Look at verses 49-50.

49 but when they saw him walking on the lake, they thought he was a ghost. They cried out, 50 because they all saw him and were terrified. Immediately he spoke to them and said, "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid."

Why did they think he was a ghost?

Because it couldn’t possibly be Jesus, could it?

Surely nobody, not even Jesus, can walk on water.

So they settled for another, even more implausible, supernatural explanation – a ghost.

And it’s very much the same today. So many prefer other forms of ‘spirituality’ rather than believing the solid evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

But Jesus says, Take courage! It is I. Don’t be afraid!

But how can we take courage when we’re being buffeted by the waves?

How can we not be afraid?

The key is in those three little words IT IS I.

In context it could simply mean, It’s not a ghost. It’s me.

But literally translated we can understand it to mean far more than that.

Jesus actually says I AM. The name by which God revealed himself to Moses.

The eternally self-existent one.

If we wonder how it was that Jesus could walk on water, and how he could give Peter the power to do so, we have only to remember who he was –

The I AM with whom all things are possible.

But Mark doesn’t mention Peter walking on the water.

It’s Matthew who tells us. At this point in the story before Jesus gets into the boat, Matthew tells us that Peter says, Lord, if it's you, tell me to come to you on the water.

And Jesus says, Come.

Then Peter gets out of the boat, walks on the water and comes towards Jesus.

But when he sees the wind, he’s afraid and begins to sink.

So he cries out, Lord, save me!

And immediately Jesus reaches out his hand and catches him.

You of little faith, Jesus says, Why did you doubt? (Matthew 14:28-31).

We won’t take time to discuss why Mark does not include this amazing miracle. Any attempt to do so would be sheer conjecture. What’s important here is that

· Jesus is giving one of his disciples an opportunity to exercise faith in him

· Peter actually walked on water

· He soon wavered after Jesus told him to come.

This is so typical of the fluctuating faith of all the disciples throughout the Gospels,

and, if we’re honest, of ours today.

But back to the passage in Mark.

51 Then he climbed into the boat with them, and the wind died down. They were completely amazed, 52 for they had not understood about the loaves; their hearts were hardened.

Notice that Jesus didn’t rebuke the wind this time.

It died down as soon as he was in the boat.

His very presence was enough to calm both the wind and the anxious hearts of the disciples.

But what does Mark mean when he says that they had not understood about the loaves, and that their hearts were hardened?

And how do we reconcile this with Matthew’s account which says that they worshipped him saying, You are the Son of God!?

The reference to the loaves, of course, relates to the feeding of the five thousand earlier in the chapter.

It’s clear that they were not expecting such a miracle,

and, even when it happened, they did not fully understand the full significance of it.

Surely miracles like this were pointing to the fact that Jesus was the Son of God, and yet they hardly dared to believe it.

They were amazed because they hadn’t understood who Jesus was.

And so, as we’ve already pointed out, their faith frequently fluctuated, up one minute, down the next. Or, down one minute, up the next!

And this may explain why Matthew could say that the disciples worshipped Jesus and said, You are the Son of God.

They’re doubting one minute, believing the next.

Their initial reaction is amazement. They want to believe, but they hardly dare to.

But after they witness the miracle of Peter walking on water their faith rises and they worship Jesus and acknowledge who he is.

Compare Peter’s confession in Matthew 16.

The realisation of who Jesus is comes by revelation from Heaven.

The process of coming to this understanding was gradual, reaching a climax in a flash of revelation. And it doesn’t just happen once. We need repeated revelation, and repeatedly to confess who Jesus is. And this was Jesus’ purpose – building their faith and bringing them to a steadfast understanding of who he is. It was a gradual process, as it is with us.

But however wavering our faith we can be sure that his faithfulness will always bring us to the other side. As verse 53 tells us – they crossed over, they landed… and they anchored there.

So, to summarise, in this incident we see how Jesus tests and strengthens his disciples’ faith. He sends them ahead without him. He allows them to go through another storm, but he still has his eye on them. He does the impossible by walking on water to encourage them and even allows Peter to walk on water too, despite his wavering faith. And of course, he gets them all safely to the other side. It was Jesus who had told them to make the journey in the first place. And all this enables them to appreciate better who he is.

But before we leave Mark 6, let’s read the last few verses of the chapter.

54 As soon as they got out of the boat, people recognized Jesus. 55 They ran throughout that whole region and carried the sick on mats to wherever they heard he was. 56 And wherever he went – into villages, towns or countryside – they placed the sick in the marketplaces. They begged him to let them touch even the edge of his cloak, and all who touched him were healed.

These verses are a summary of Jesus’ ministry at that time. Notice the words wherever he was, wherever he went. The healings recorded in the Gospels were no isolated incidents. They were happening everywhere, in villages, towns, and countryside. As we saw in earlier talks, they were evidence of the truth that the kingdom of God was among them and that Jesus was who he claimed to be, the Son of God.

The need for any of us to walk on water today would be exceptional, but the need for healing is always with us. In the passage we have just read five facts stand out:

They recognised Jesus

They ran to him

They requested (begged) him to heal them

They reached out and touched him

They received their healing.

Is it always like that today? If we’re honest, the answer is no. The extent to which miracles of healing are happening varies from place to place. As we saw in Chapter 5, even Jesus’ power to work miracles was limited in Nazareth because of their unbelief. And there were times in his ministry when he didn’t heal everyone as we see from John’s account of Jesus healing at the Pool of Bethesda. The key to his miracles, and indeed to his whole life, was that he only did what he saw the Father do (John 5:19).

We cannot tell God what to do, but we can like Jesus spend time with God and let him tell us what to do. So the five points mentioned above are not a formula for healing. There’s no such thing, and the belief that there is can lead to bitter disappointment. But in our search for healing we can and we should recognise that Jesus is Lord, run to him with our request, and reach out in faith, believing that we will receive our healing in God’s own good time. He does work miracles of healing today, but we need to remember that all healing in this life is temporary. The ultimate healing will take place when we receive new bodies when Jesus comes again. Meanwhile, keep your eyes on Jesus. He will get you there.

For more on this important subject, please see Just a Taste of Heaven – a Biblical and Balanced Approach to God’s Healing Power, available from my website: www.davidpetts.org

View Details

Talk 18 Mark 6:30-44 Feeding the Five Thousand

Welcome to Talk 18 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’ll be looking at Mark 6:30-44 where we read of the amazing miracle of how Jesus fed over 5000 people with five small loaves and two small fishes. Mark tells us that these people were, as so many are today, like sheep without a shepherd, and today I want to concentrate on what the passage shows us about the people, about the disciples, and about Jesus.

But first let’s read the passage to remind ourselves of the details of what happened.

30 The apostles gathered around Jesus and reported to him all they had done and taught. 31 Then, because so many people were coming and going that they did not even have a chance to eat, he said to them, "Come with me by yourselves to a quiet place and get some rest." 32 So they went away by themselves in a boat to a solitary place.

33 But many who saw them leaving recognized them and ran on foot from all the towns and got there ahead of them. 34 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things.

35 By this time it was late in the day, so his disciples came to him. "This is a remote place," they said, "and it's already very late. 36 Send the people away so they can go to the surrounding countryside and villages and buy themselves something to eat." 37 But he answered, "You give them something to eat." They said to him, "That would take eight months of a man's wages! Are we to go and spend that much on bread and give it to them to eat?"

38 "How many loaves do you have?" he asked. "Go and see." When they found out, they said, "Five – and two fish." 39 Then Jesus directed them to have all the people sit down in groups on the green grass. 40 So they sat down in groups of hundreds and fifties. 41 Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all. 42 They all ate and were satisfied, 43 and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces of bread and fish. 44 The number of the men who had eaten was five thousand.

The people

So let’s begin by considering the condition of the people. Verse 34 tells us that they were like sheep without a shepherd (34). To understand what this means we need to remember that the role of a shepherd was to lead and feed his sheep. This is well illustrated in Psalm 23 where David says:

The Lord is my shepherd. I lack nothing. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters, he refreshes my soul.

But these people were like sheep without a shepherd. Notice the word like. We’re not told that they were sheep without a shepherd. The Greek literally says they were like sheep not having a shepherd. But surely they had a shepherd. Wasn’t the Lord their shepherd? Didn’t Psalm 23 apply to them? Of course it did. The Lord was their shepherd, but, as so often with Israel of old, they were acting as though he were not, some because they were ignorant of it and others because they were unwilling to be led by him. And if you’re not willing to be led, you can’t expect to be fed! A sheep without a shepherd will probably find food somewhere, but it won’t find the green pastures and quiet waters that only the shepherd can provide.

What’s more, one of the great things about being led by the Lord is not just that he takes care of you and meets your needs, but that he gives you a sense of direction in life. He leads you. But the people in this passage, like so many people today, were aimlessly running to and fro, without any clear purpose in life other than to get their needs met. They ran on foot from all the towns (33). They were constantly coming and going (31). The word going here literally means departing. Why didn’t they STAY? Of course, some did. The disciples did. But many were departing. They were in a constant state of flux.

The key to understanding the root cause of this is found in verse 34, where we’re told that Jesus began teaching them many things. This shows very clearly that they had a lot to learn. Of course they would have known well enough about the current political situation with the occupying Roman forces as a constant reminder. They would have known about the history of their nation and of God’s deliverances in the past, and they were well aware of the religious laws of their Bible as they were interpreted by the rabbis in their synagogues. But there was still much that they needed to learn, that only Jesus could teach them. Only Jesus could show them the way to Heaven.

And it’s just the same today. Most people know something about politics and history and law. Some even know something about the teachings of the Bible, but there is still much coming and going, still no clear understanding of truth. Despite all the advances of science and our knowledge of the natural world, people are still living in uncertainty, with no real sense of direction and purpose in their lives. Refusing to be led by the good shepherd, they are failing to find the green pastures to which only he can take them. But that’s where our role as Jesus’ disciples is so important. It’s our responsibility to make sure that everyone at least has the opportunity to know the truth. It’s by knowing the truth that people are set free (John 8:32). So let’s now see what we can learn about the disciples in this passage.

The disciples

At the start of our passage the disciples have just come back from the mission Jesus sent them on. They were excited to tell Jesus all they had done and taught (30). They had preached that people should repent and they had cast out demons and healed many who were sick (12). And by the end of the passage they had become instruments in one of the greatest miracles Jesus ever performed. They were truly a privileged group of people.

But they were also in many ways quite ordinary people, and our passage reveals some of the weaknesses that are sometimes seen in our lives as Christians, and perhaps especially of those God uses in miraculous ways like healing. It’s clear from verse 31 that the apostles were under pressure from the demands of the people. So many people were coming and going that they did not even have a chance to eat (31) and, when Jesus suggested they go somewhere quiet to get some rest, it must have been frustrating for them to see that the people had got there ahead of them (33).

I can’t help wondering if the disciples were irritated by this. I know from personal experience how easy it is for this to happen. Just when we think we might have found a solution to a problem, it can so easily crop up again when we’re least expecting it. Problems do sometimes seem to get there ahead of us. And the ‘problem’ on this occasion was the very people whose problems they were there to deal with! They wanted Jesus to send the people away (36). The reason they gave might suggest that they were genuinely concerned for the people:

…so they can go …and buy themselves something to eat.

But was this really their motivation, or were they more concerned for themselves than for the people? After all, hadn’t Jesus told them that they needed a rest? Of course, we can’t be sure what the disciples’ real motives were, but if we’re honest we know how easy it is to think of a good reason for doing what’s most convenient for ourselves. Only Jesus was entirely selfless, putting the needs of others before himself.

But before we turn our attention to Jesus, we need to point out another weakness in the disciples that we often find in ourselves as well. Despite all the miracles Jesus had already performed, and indeed the healings and exorcisms they had experienced in their own ministry, the disciples still had a tendency to doubt when the problem they were confronted with seemed insoluble. When Jesus told them to give the people something to eat (37) they responded by saying, That would take eight months of a man's wages!

It seems they thought that Jesus was making an unreasonable demand. And at a natural level it probably would have been. It’s unlikely that they carried that much money with them, so how could they possibly feed a crowd of several thousand? Their mistake was to forget that when there was no natural solution, with God there might aways the possibility of a miracle. And, of course, with the benefit of hindsight, we know that that’s exactly what Jesus had in mind.

So is it wrong to seek a natural solution to our problems when we know we have a miracle working God? By no means. We mustn’t limit God to working in one way only. We certainly mustn’t limit him to working naturally, but neither must we limit him to working supernaturally. For example, he may heal by natural means, or he may heal us supernaturally. Proclaiming the kingdom of God means proclaiming that God is king. That means that he decides! We should never forget that he is able to work a miracle, but that he may choose to work through natural means.

When looking for a miracle the important question is, Have you heard from Jesus? The disciples had the benefit of hearing directly from him and when they followed his instructions they discovered that on this occasion his purpose was a miracle rather than a natural solution to the problem. But that brings us to the person of Jesus himself. What does this passage teach us about him?

Jesus

Perhaps the most important thing we learn about Jesus in this passage is his compassion for the people.

When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things.

They were like sheep without a shepherd, so he began to teach them. We were all like sheep going astray (1 Peter 2:25), but like the shepherd in the parable of the lost sheep (Luke 15:1-7), Jesus sought us and found us and has rescued us by laying down his life for the sheep (John 10:11). That’s what Jesus is doing for the people here in this passage, and Matthew and Luke tell us that he was not only teaching them and feeding them, but he was also healing them. Jesus was giving his life for them even before he died on the cross. And if compassion is not our motivation, then any words that we may say or any miracles we may perform will be of little value.

And Jesus’ compassion is evident not only in his care for the crowds. It is also seen in his concern for his disciples. They had just returned from a mission of preaching and healing and he knew they needed rest. So he says in verse 31, Come with me by yourselves to a quiet place and get some rest.

It’s interesting that he does not say, go away and get some rest. He says, Come with me… He knew that they needed to be alone with him. In Mark 3:14 we read that he chose twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach… Now, as they return from the mission he sent them on, it’s just as important that they spend time with him even as they rest. It’s vital that Christian workers learn this lesson. We all need time to rest, and to rest in him.

And Jesus’ concern for his disciples is also seen in the training he gives them. He tells them, You give them something to eat. He involves them in one of the greatest miracles he would ever perform. He guides them step by step through a lesson in faith that so far they have never experienced. Notice the following six things:

He asks them to assess the seriousness of the situation.

"How many loaves do you have? Go and see."

He directs them to prepare for the impossible.

…have all the people sit down in groups on the green grass.

He prays.

…looking up to heaven, he gave thanks.

He acts in faith.

He broke the loaves.

He involves them in the miracle.

Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people.

He does not allow anything to be wasted

the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces

(cf. John 6:12 Let nothing be wasted). Perhaps for them to eat later?

He was not expecting this kind of miracle every day. Neither should we.

So in this passage we have seen Jesus’ compassion for the people and his concern for his disciples. But before we conclude we need to take note of Jesus’ confidence in his Father. He did nothing except what he saw the Father do (John 5:19) and so before he breaks the loaves and the fish he looks up to Heaven – unlike the disciples who looked around for the solution (36). He has already organised the people into groups ready to feed them although as yet he had only five loaves and two fishes. But his eyes were not on the paucity of natural resources, nor on the immensity of the multitude. His eyes were on Heaven.

And the qualities we see in Jesus in this passage are qualities that are seen over and over again throughout his life. He lived and died because of his compassion for us sinners who were like sheep without a shepherd. He was able to do this because of his complete dependence on and obedience to his heavenly Father. And he is still training disciples and involving them in miraculous provision to demonstrate his love and compassion for a world that is lost without him.

So let's be aware of the condition of the people around us, let's try to avoid the mistakes the disciples made, and let's follow the example of Jesus and love those who reject our testimony, even if necessary by laying down our lives for the sake of the gospel.

View Details

Talk 17 Mark 6:14-29 Herod and John the Baptist

Welcome to Talk 17 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 6:14-29 which relates the terrible story of the beheading of John the Baptist. The passage is set between Jesus sending out his disciples to proclaim the good news and their return to report to him all they had done and taught (v30). At first sight, the beheading of John the Baptist might seem to be something of a digression, but, when we remember the theme of our last talk, it becomes clear that there’s a very real continuity of thought in this passage.

Last time we saw how the people of Jesus’ home town rejected him and how, when Jesus sent out his disciples, he told them to shake the dust off their feet as a testimony against any who rejected their message about him. Today’s passage begins in verses 14-16 with the theme of people’s attitude to Jesus and his message, and continues with the story of how one particular person, King Herod, hardened his heart against the preaching of John the Baptist and ended up by ordering his execution. And we know from Acts 4:27 and Luke 23:12 that this eventually led to his conspiring with Pontius Pilate against Jesus himself.

But let’s begin by reading the passage to remind ourselves of the details.

14 King Herod heard about this, for Jesus' name had become well known. Some were saying, "John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him." 15 Others said, "He is Elijah." And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago." 16 But when Herod heard this, he said, "John, the man I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!" 17 For Herod himself had given orders to have John arrested, and he had him bound and put in prison. He did this because of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, whom he had married. 18 For John had been saying to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19 So Herodias nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him. But she was not able to, 20 because Herod feared John and protected him, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man. When Herod heard John, he was greatly puzzled; yet he liked to listen to him. 21 Finally the opportune time came. On his birthday Herod gave a banquet for his high officials and military commanders and the leading men of Galilee. 22 When the daughter of Herodias came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his dinner guests. The king said to the girl, "Ask me for anything you want, and I'll give it to you." 23 And he promised her with an oath, "Whatever you ask I will give you, up to half my kingdom." 24 She went out and said to her mother, "What shall I ask for?" "The head of John the Baptist," she answered. 25 At once the girl hurried in to the king with the request: "I want you to give me right now the head of John the Baptist on a platter. 26 The king was greatly distressed, but because of his oaths and his dinner guests, he did not want to refuse her. 27 So he immediately sent an executioner with orders to bring John's head. The man went, beheaded John in the prison, 28 and brought back his head on a platter. He presented it to the girl, and she gave it to her mother. 29 On hearing of this, John's disciples came and took his body and laid it in a tomb.

The fact that Jesus' name had become well known (v14) is not surprising, bearing in mind the miracles he was performing and the great crowds who gathered around him. The miracles were causing people to wonder exactly who Jesus was. He reminded them of what they had heard about Elijah and the miracles he performed. Some even thought Jesus was Elijah, possibly basing their assumption on Malachi’s prophecy that God would one day send Elijah back before the day of the Lord came (Malachi 4:5). (Although Jesus said in Mark 9:13 that it was actually John who was the promised ‘Elijah’). Others thought that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead. This included King Herod who said, John, the man I beheaded, has been raised from the dead! (v16).

Mark then goes on to explain how and why Herod came to order John’s execution, but before we go any further it’s important to identify which Herod we are talking about, as the New Testament makes reference to no less than four different Herods, all of whom were unpleasant characters, to say the least. Perhaps it will be easiest to say which Herod this is NOT. This Herod is not Herod the Great (so-called) who wanted to kill the baby Jesus and massacred the baby boys in Matthew 2. He is not Herod Agrippa I, who was smitten by the angel of the Lord and died because of his pride in Acts 12, neither is he Herod Agrippa II before whom Paul conducted his defence in Acts 25-26. The Herod who executed John the Baptist was Herod Antipas whose final attitude to Jesus is found in Luke 23:7-12.

There we’re told that Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, who happened to be in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus’ trial, because Jesus came from the region of Galilee where Herod was the ruler and was therefore under his jurisdiction. Herod was pleased to see Jesus because, from what he’d already heard about him, he hoped to see him perform some miracle. He asked him many questions, but when Jesus refused to reply, he ridiculed and mocked him, dressed him in an elegant robe, and sent him back to Pilate, who then became his friend although up to that point they had been enemies. Herod was thus complicit in the crucifixion of Jesus as Acts 4:26-27 makes clear:

The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the Lord and against his anointed one. Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel to conspire against your holy servant Jesus whom you anointed.

So Herod and Pilate banded together against the Lord and conspired against Jesus. And now, as we return to our passage in Mark 6, we see that it was by hardening his heart to God’s word through John the Baptist that Herod took the first steps that led ultimately to his role in the crucifixion of Jesus. His attitude to God’s servant, John, was finally to determine his attitude to God’s Son, Jesus Christ. Jesus once said:

Very truly I tell you, whoever accepts anyone I send accepts me; and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me (John 13:20).

To accept Christ’s message through the messengers he sends is to accept Christ himself, and to reject his message through the messengers he sends is to reject Christ himself. In rejecting God’s message through John, Herod finally came to ridicule and reject Christ.

But this need not have happened. Herod had every opportunity to accept John’s message of repentance. Verse 18 tells us that John had been saying to Herod, It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife. And the tense of the Greek verb indicates that he had done so repeatedly. But instead of repenting, Herod had John put in prison where John continued to preach the same message.

So Herod had plenty of opportunity to repent. He knew that John was a righteous and holy man. He feared him and he liked to listen to him but was greatly puzzled by what he heard. This verb (aporeomai) is sometimes translated in the New Testament as perplexed and can also convey the idea of doubt. The mental confusion that caused Herod to doubt sprang from the fact that he knew what was right but was unwilling to do it. There were so many voices clamouring for his attention – the voice of conscience telling him that his relationship with Herodias was sinful, the voice of John the Baptist constantly confirming that he must repent, the voice of Herodias demanding John’s death, and the voice of the flesh telling him that he must protect his own reputation at all costs. No wonder we’re told that he was perplexed.

And so, although for a time he protected John from Herodias’s thirst for his blood, the time came when, trapped by his own foolish vow, he murdered, without a fair trial, the man who Jesus said was the greatest person who had ever lived (Matthew 11:11), and in so doing involved a young girl [1] in the bloody process, undoubtedly psychologically damaging her for the rest of her life. But we know the story. It remains now for us to summarise where Herod went wrong.

It began with his decision to break God’s law and live in adultery with his brother’s wife. Instead of listening to the voice of conscience and repenting at the preaching of John the Baptist, he chose to continue to disobey God. Embarrassed by John’s public denunciation of his lifestyle, he attempted to silence him by putting him in prison. Infatuated with a young dancing girl he made a foolish oath, and when, at her mother’s instigation, she made the most outrageous demand, he lacked the moral courage to refuse it for fear of what others might think. This series of wrongly motivated decisions led finally to the ultimate decision – the rejection of Christ.

But before we conclude this message, let’s turn our attention away from the evil Herod to the man he beheaded, God’s faithful servant, John the Baptist. As we saw in Mark 1, the heart of the message God had called John to preach was that everyone needed to repent in preparation for the coming of the Messiah, and vast crowds came to be baptised in the Jordan confessing their sins. It’s clear from Luke 3 that the message was for all – soldiers, tax-collectors, religious leaders, and even for political leaders like King Herod. As we have seen, John told him in no uncertain terms that his relationship with his brother’s wife was wrong, and rebuked him for all the other evil things he had done (Luke 3:19) which led to his arrest, imprisonment and eventually his execution.

John was imprisoned before Jesus started his public ministry in Galilee (Mark 1:14) but his execution took place some time later. We know little of the time John spent in prison except that Matthew tells us that:

When John heard in prison what Christ was doing, he sent his disciples to ask him, "Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?" Jesus replied, "Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me" (Matthew 11:2-6).

John’s question shows that he was beginning to doubt if Jesus really was the promised Messiah despite the evidence of the miracles Jesus was doing. He was doubting the testimony of Scriptures like Isaiah 61:1-2 which Jesus said was being fulfilled in his miraculous ministry, and he was even doubting his own testimony that Jesus was the lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world. More serious still, he was doubting the testimony of God himself, who at Jesus’ baptism had declared that Jesus was his beloved Son.

These serious doubts would have been caused by the circumstances in which he found himself, unjustly imprisoned, and cut off from fellowship with like-minded people, but also perhaps by the expectation that the Messiah would proclaim freedom for the captives and release for the prisoners (Isaiah 61:1, Luke 4:18). If Jesus really was the Messiah, why was John still in prison? It’s all too easy to doubt when circumstances tell us that God has not kept the promises we believe he has made us, and John was no exception.

But fortunately, there is a remedy for doubt. John sent a message to Jesus and Jesus gave him the answer. Note that even though John was doubting who Jesus was, he still made contact with him. If you’re doubting God, it might seem illogical, but contact him anyway. When my philosophy tutor at Oxford confidently asserted that he could disprove the existence of God, as soon as the tutorial was over I said, God, if there is a God, HELP. And he did! My AV Bible fell open at Psalm 119:99 where I read:

I have more understanding than all my teachers, for thy testimonies are my meditation.

And my doubts were gone. So if your circumstances are causing you to doubt, do what John did. Keep in touch with Jesus, and if it seems that he’s not keeping his promises to you, let him remind you of the things he has done for you and of how he has worked in the lives of others. Faith is not the absence of doubt. It’s trusting the Lord despite our doubts and leaving the outcome with him. In the KJV Jesus’ final word to John was:

Blessed is he who is not offended in me (v6).

John’s doubts were leading him towards the danger of taking offense at Jesus like the people of Nazareth in Mark 6:3. The Greek word is the same, and as we saw last time it’s frequently used in the New Testament to mean a stumbling block or something that trips you up. What tripped up the people of Nazareth was their refusal to see beyond the humanity of Jesus. For John the potential stumbling block was that if Jesus really was the Messiah, why was he not setting him free from Herod’s prison?

One lesson we can learn from this is that we must not be offended by God’s will for our lives. Some promises – especially with regard to the body – will not reach final fulfilment until the redemption of the body at the resurrection. When circumstances are against us, and when we’re not yet experiencing the fulfilment of one of God’s promises, it's all too easy to give way to doubt. The remedy is to concentrate on the many wonderful promises we have seen fulfilled in our lives and to rejoice in what we hear God is doing for others, even if we are not yet experiencing the same blessings that they are. If the great John the Baptist could come to the point of doubting the very truth of what God had called him to preach, we should not be surprised or feel condemned if we are tempted to doubt.

Eventually, of course, John was liberated from the prison, but perhaps not in the way he was expecting or hoping. Death, for those who believe in Jesus, is the ultimate release, whether it be from imprisonment, or sickness, or any other form of suffering. Death is the gateway to Heaven where there is no mourning, or crying, or pain (Revelation 21:4). John’s headless body was laid in a tomb, but he himself was already enjoying the rewards of Heaven, far beyond the reach of evil people like Herod and Herodias.

[1] The Greek word korasion is used of Jairus’s daughter who was only 12 years old (Mark 5:41, 42).

View Details

Talk 15 Mark 5:21-43 More amazing miracles

Welcome to Talk 15 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. In our last two talks we have seen the mighty power of Jesus displayed in the calming of the storm on the Sea of Galilee and the deliverance of a man possessed by a legion of demons. We now turn to Mark 5:21-43 where Jesus cures a woman with a longstanding problem with bleeding and raises a dead girl to life. As today we won’t be working through the passage verse by verse, we’ll begin by reading the entire story to remind ourselves of what happened.

21 When Jesus had again crossed over by boat to the other side of the lake, a large crowd gathered around him while he was by the lake. 22 Then one of the synagogue rulers, named Jairus, came there. Seeing Jesus, he fell at his feet 23 and pleaded earnestly with him, "My little daughter is dying. Please come and put your hands on her so that she will be healed and live." 24 So Jesus went with him. A large crowd followed and pressed around him. 25 And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. 26 She had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse. 27 When she heard about Jesus, she came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, 28 because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed." 29 Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering. 30 At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?" 31 "You see the people crowding against you," his disciples answered, "and yet you can ask, 'Who touched me?'" 32 But Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it. 33 Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth. 34 He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."

35 While Jesus was still speaking, some men came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue ruler. "Your daughter is dead," they said. "Why bother the teacher any more?" 36 Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe." 37 He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James and John the brother of James. 38 When they came to the home of the synagogue ruler, Jesus saw a commotion, with people crying and wailing loudly. 39 He went in and said to them, "Why all this commotion and wailing? The child is not dead but asleep." 40 But they laughed at him. After he put them all out, he took the child's father and mother and the disciples who were with him and went in where the child was. 41 He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha koum!" (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!"). 42 Immediately the girl stood up and walked around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished. 43 He gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this and told them to give her something to eat.

The passage begins by telling us that once Jesus had come back across the lake a large crowd gathered around him. We have already seen how frequently Mark tells us that great crowds followed Jesus. In 1:28 we read that because of his miracles, news about him spread quickly over the whole region. In 1:32-34 we’re told that the whole town gathered at the door.

Just notice the references to crowds in the following verses:

2:2 So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door...

2:13 A large crowd came to him and he began to teach them.

3:7 A large crowd from Galilee followed

3:9 Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready....

3:32 A crowd was sitting around him...

4:1 The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat...

And now in 5:21 we read that a large crowd had gathered. And again in verse 24, A large crowd followed and pressed around him and in verse 31 the disciples say, You see the people crowding against you. But, of course, crowds are made up of individuals, and in the passage we have just read Mark tells us of two of the individuals who were part of the crowd. Their needs represent the needs of many in the crowd, and the needs of many even today – perhaps even your need. This passage reveals some important lessons about what to do when, like them, you’re faced with an apparently insoluble problem.

In many ways Jairus and the woman were very different. The woman who, because of her condition, was considered ceremonially unclean, would have been excluded from the synagogue. She was living with loneliness, sickness, and poverty. Jairus, on the other hand, as ruler of the synagogue, was in a privileged and financially secure position, enjoying the respect of the community. He had everything going for him. She had everything going against her.

Yet, despite these differences, there was one thing they both had in common. They both faced insoluble problems. She was beyond medical help and Jairus had a daughter who was dying. But they both found a solution – they came to Jesus. They came in different ways – he came openly, she came secretly – but they came knowing that their only hope of a solution lay in Jesus. But let’s look at each of them in a little more detail.

The woman

First, notice the severity of her condition. It had lasted for twelve years. She had spent all she had in seeking a medical cure, but instead of getting better, her condition was deteriorating. Mark says that she had suffered many things under the care of many doctors. Of course, the art of medicine was nowhere near as advanced as it is today, and we certainly should not take this verse to mean that it’s wrong to avail ourselves of medical help. (I deal with this in some detail in my book, Just a Taste of Heaven – a biblical and balanced approach to God’s healing power). Mark’s intention is not so much to criticise the doctors as to point out the extremity of the woman’s condition – that she had no hope, other than in Jesus.

But notice now what motivated her action. She was clearly very determined, but determination was not what motivated her. It was faith that motivated both her determination and her action. Jesus said it was her faith that saved her and freed her from her suffering (v34). She believed that if she could just touch his cloak, she would be healed (v28). But how did she come to have such faith? The clue lies in verse 27 – she heard about Jesus. Paul tells us in Romans 10:17 that faith comes by hearing the word about Christ.

No doubt she had heard about some of the miracles Jesus had already performed. The news had already spread far and wide and the miracles were the main reason that the people crowded around him. This woman was no exception, and she believed that what he had done for others, he could and would do for her. And her faith was rewarded immediately. At once (v30) Jesus’ healing power flows out of him. Immediately (v29) her bleeding stops and she feels it in her body. It’s never too late with Jesus, even after twelve years!

And with Jesus you so often get much more than you’re believing for. She receives far more than the healing of her body. Jesus knew that someone had touched him, and he kept looking around to see who had done it (v32). Why was this so important? The answer lies in verse 33:

33 Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth.

Again, I’m reminded of what Paul says in Romans 10. Salvation comes not only from believing in our heart, but by confessing with our mouth (Romans 10:9). The woman had already shown great faith, but Jesus wanted her to acknowledge what her need had been. This would not have been easy, bearing in mind the stigma of being ceremonially unclean that she had carried for so long. But her public declaration of it made way for Jesus’ public pronouncement in verse 34:

…"Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."

There is so much more than physical healing here. The word for healed conveys so much more. It’s used frequently in the New Testament to refer to our salvation. And what a wonderful picture of salvation we see in this woman’s encounter with Jesus! There is acceptance – Jesus calls her daughter. There is peace – the Greek word is the equivalent of the Hebrew SHALOM. And there is freedom. In healing her Jesus restores all that the dreadful condition had stolen from her. And in saving us from our sins he has done the same for us.

Jairus

As we’ve already pointed out, unlike the woman who came to Jesus secretly, Jairus came quite openly. His daughter was dying, and he urgently needed Jesus’ help. We don’t know the nature of his daughter’s illness or how long she had been ill, but by the time Jairus was seeking Jesus’ help she was at the point of death. Her need of immediate attention was even greater than that of the woman. Jairus was intentionally looking for Jesus in the crowd and as soon as he saw him he fell at his feet.

In different circumstances, as a synagogue ruler, he might well have been reluctant to do this, bearing in mind the close connection synagogue rulers had with the Pharisees who were, as we have seen, already plotting to kill Jesus (Mark 3:6). But Jairus was not afraid to risk their displeasure. His daughter was dying, and he knew that Jesus could heal her. Like the woman, Jairus had faith in Jesus’ power to heal, and he was willing to humble himself publicly to beg Jesus to do so. Interestingly, he falls at Jesus’ feet in prayer before the need is met whereas the woman does so in thanksgiving after she is healed. In both cases the action is an appropriate acknowledgement of who Jesus is and what he can do.

But it’s at this point that the woman touches Jesus’ cloak and Jesus is delayed in getting to Jairus’ daughter. We can well imagine Jairus’ anxiety and frustration about this, but as we’ve already seen, it’s never too late with Jesus. So as we pick up the story in verse 36, even when news comes that his daughter has now died, Jesus tells him, Don’t be afraid. Just believe. The Greek Imperative here means literally keep on believing. Jairus had had faith for his daughter’s healing, but now he needs faith that Jesus can raise her back to life. If ever we’re in a similar situation it will be helpful to remember that faith looks beyond the problem to the person who is able to solve the problem. Jesus was asking Jairus to keep on trusting him. Raising the dead is no more difficult for Jesus than healing the incurably sick.

So Jairus’ faith was tested, but the woman’s was not. Her faith was immediately rewarded. God deals with different people in different ways. Don’t be discouraged when you see others receiving an immediate response to their faith while yours is being tested. Remember that the Christian life is by faith from first to last (Romans 1:17) and that your faith will ultimately be rewarded.

After encouraging Jairus to keep on believing, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John to Jairus’s home. On more than one occasion these three were chosen by Jesus to accompany him at critical times in his ministry – at his transfiguration, and in the Garden of Gethsamane, for example. But why he did not allow any of the other disciples to come with him is not clear. However, it seems reasonable to assume that all the disciples were at different stages in the development of their faith and understanding, and this may have been a determining factor in making his decision on this occasion.

If the other disciples thought that it was unfair – and this seems quite likely bearing in mind their indignation when James and John asked Jesus for unique privileges in the coming kingdom (Mark 10:35-41) – what they did not know was that in time they would all witness an even greater miracle than the raising of Jairus’ daughter – the raising of Lazarus. And eventually they would meet the risen Christ. God’s timing in his dealings with us is one of the hardest things for us to understand. We just need to keep on trusting him. He loves us and whatever he gives to us or withholds from us, is for our good. Christ is the head of the church and to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it (Ephesians 4:7).

So they arrive at Jairus’s house and there’s a crowd of people weeping and wailing, as was the custom at the time. Jesus silences them and says, The child is not dead but asleep. He says this to indicate that the child’s death was only temporary, because he knew that he was about to bring her back to life. But, quite understandably, the people laugh at him, knowing, Luke tells us, that she was dead (Luke 8:53). They may have known she was dead, but they didn’t know who Jesus was! To him who is the resurrection and the life (John11:25) raising the dead is no more difficult than waking them up. And the day is surely coming when the Lord himself will descend from Heaven with a loud command and those who have ‘fallen asleep’ in Jesus will rise from the dead. His command is enough. Talitha koum! Little girl, get up! And immediately she stands up and walks around. Yet another evidence of his deity, which, for the time being, must be kept a secret, because his time has not yet come.

But now let’s summarise what we have learnt from this passage about what to do when we are faced with insoluble problems. We have seen that, whatever our differences, we all need Jesus. We all have needs and we need to admit it. We need to acknowledge we’ve got a problem.

But however great your problem, Jesus has the answer. Make a conscious decision to come to Jesus. Ignore the crowd. Humble yourself – don’t worry about what others might think or say about you. Come in faith. Faith comes by hearing the message about Christ. Believe the message you’ve just been listening to. If you need more faith, read the Gospels. What he’s done for others, he can do for you. Trust him.

Sometimes our faith is rewarded immediately. Sometimes it’s tested. Things might seem to get worse before they get better – but keep on believing. Faith looks beyond the problem to the person who can solve it – Jesus. And it’s never too late for Jesus.

And finally, remember that Jesus can do far more than solve the problem you’re currently dealing with. Our greatest problem is our sin. But Jesus offers us forgiveness for all we’ve ever done wrong. He offers you peace, life, freedom, acceptance, restoration, and a home in Heaven when you die. Acknowledge your need. Come to Jesus. Put your faith in him. He is the only solution.

View Details

Talk 14 Mark 5:1-20 Legion

Welcome to Talk 14 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’ll be looking at Mark 5:1-20 where Jesus casts demons out of a man who was inhabited by a legion of them. As the story is well known I’ll not take time to read through the passage in advance, but take it a verse or two at a time, beginning with verses 1-2:

They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. 2 When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an unclean spirit came from the tombs to meet him.

1 They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes.

In our last talk we saw how Jesus calmed the storm on the Sea (or lake) of Galilee and how the disciples were overawed, asking the question, Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him. They had left from Capernaum at the northern end of the lake and this verse tells us that they arrived in the region of the Gerasenes which is south-east of the lake, so their crossing would have been about ten to fifteen miles. The region was largely inhabited by Gentiles and was part of a larger area known as the Decapolis (or Ten Cities) which is referred to in verse 20. It’s clear that Jesus had a definite purpose in going there (4:35) and this becomes evident in what happens next.

2 When Jesus got out of the boat

Literally, immediately Jesus got out of the boat. Students of Mark’s Gospel will know that one of the characteristics of his writing is the frequent use of the Greek word euthus (immediately). Its significance here may well be to underline that Jesus’ sole purpose in crossing the lake was to meet the desperate need of the demon possessed man. This is confirmed by the fact that in verse 21, as soon as he has dealt with the man’s need, Jesus returns to the other side of the lake.

a man with an unclean spirit came from the tombs to meet him

Literally: …there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit (ESV).

Interestingly, in their accounts of the same story Matthew describes him as demonized (8:28) and Luke says that the man had demons (8:27). This shows that the gospel writers use different expressions to refer to the same man and the same condition. And elsewhere Mark himself uses these alternative expressions too. He refers to a person:

Having an unclean spirit (Mark 1:26)

Being demonized (Mark 1:32)

Having a demon (Mark 3:30)

So these different expressions are used interchangeably and it would be a mistake to try to differentiate between them. It’s clear that an unclean spirit is a demon and that a person with an unclean spirit may be said to be demonized or to have a demon. And any of these expressions can be used to refer a variety of different conditions caused by demonic activity. Perhaps that’s why Mark says here with an unclean spirit, when it’s clear from the story that he was controlled by many demons.

But now verses 3-5.

3 This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain. 4 For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.

These verses reveal the desperate condition of the man. There was a supernatural force within him that neither he nor anyone else could control. This was no mental illness, though people today might describe it that way. This was demonic power which no amount of medical or psychiatric treatment could have cured. Matthew 4:24 distinguishes between mental illness and demon possession, and it’s vital that we discern the difference, especially as some of the symptoms can be very similar.

But let’s take note of what the demons were doing to him:

· This man lived in the tombs – he was cut off from society.

· …no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain – he was beyond human help. Cf. v. 4 No one was strong enough to subdue him.

· For he had often been chained hand and foot – despite repeated efforts, nothing could be done for him.

· … he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet – the demonic forces within him gave him supernatural strength (but only to harm himself further).

· Night and day among the tombs and in the hills… - there was no relief from his torment

· … he would cry out and cut himself with stones – he was bent on self-destruction. In John 10:10 Jesus told us that the work of the devil was to steal and to kill and to destroy. And that’s what Satan’s forces do. But Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8) and to give us life to the full. That was the reason he came from Heaven and that was the reason he crossed the lake.

But that brings us to verses 6-10:

6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7 He shouted at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won't torture me!" 8 For Jesus had said to him, "Come out of this man, you evil spirit!" 9 Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" "My name is Legion," he replied, "for we are many." 10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him.

It’s clear from the passage we’ve just read that everything the man says is inspired by the demons. He seems to be completely under their control. But if he is completely under their control, how is it that he comes to Jesus? The answer must surely lie in the fact that the demons were completely under the control of Jesus. Remember what we said when we were considering Mark 3:23. Jesus has already bound the strong man (Satan). In conquering Satan during his temptation in the desert and by his continued submission to his heavenly Father Jesus had complete authority over all Satan’s forces.

The man comes to Jesus because Jesus has come to him, and for him. There was no way the demons could stop him. All they could do was beg. The verb translated fell on his knees frequently mean worship, but that is not its meaning here. It comes from a verb depicting a dog crouching before its master and licking his hand. The demons cower before Jesus and pay reluctant homage.

7 He shouted at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won't torture me!" 8 For Jesus had said to him, "Come out of this man, you evil spirit!"

Two things are clear here. First, what the man said was in fact the demons speaking through him as they had through the man in the synagogue in Capernaum (1:24). They knew who he was. They knew he had power over them. In fact, Mark 3:11 tells us that

Whenever the unclean spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, You are the Son of God.

And, according to Matthew 8:29, they pleaded that Jesus would not punish them before the appointed time. The day is coming when at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow… (Philippians 2).

And secondly, the response of the demons was a direct result of Jesus saying, Come out of this man… On seeing the man Jesus immediately commands the demon to come out of him. He does not enter into a lengthy discussion about the man’s problem. He does not ask what the man might have done that could have caused the problem. He knows the root cause and he deals with it.

9 Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" "My name is Legion," he replied, "for we are many."

Jesus asks the man his name. Note, he does not ask the demon its name. There is no sound basis here for asking demons to name themselves, as some have taught. In the Greek text the word for him is masculine. If Jesus had been speaking to the unclean spirit it would have been neuter. So the man replies – but it’s clear from what he says that it’s the demons who are speaking through him – My name is Legion, for we are many. Of course, Legion was not his real name. It’s typical of Satan to try to rob a person of their true identity. To say this is not to suggest that every person with an identity crisis has a demon, but there can be no doubt that the rapid spread of this problem in recent years is of Satanic origin.

The number of demons need not concern us, but in the Roman army a legion would have numbered anything between 3000-6000 men, and verse 13 tells us that there were about 2000 pigs that were drowned in the sea after the demons had entered them. But what’s important here is that the number of the enemy is of no concern to Jesus. No problem is too difficult for him to solve. No enemy too numerous for him to conquer.

10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

No doubt the man himself, his judgment clouded by demonic influence, would be reluctant to leave the area. The tombs, after all, had afforded him a measure of security. One thinks of prisoners who do not want to be released because they’ve become used to the security of prison or of the addict who, despite the dreadful side-effects, is frightened to kick the habit because of the sense of security it gives him.

But it’s clear from the next few verses that the demons are speaking through him too. And they do so repeatedly. They don’t want to leave, but they know that they must because Jesus has told them to. So they ask him not to send them out of the area for fear, Luke tells us, that he might send them into the Abyss (Luke 8:31) the place of confinement for Satan and his minions (Revelation 9:1, 20:1-3).

11 A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. The demons begged Jesus, "Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them." 13 He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

Why did Jesus give them permission to go into the pigs? The demons were a highly destructive force and one suggestion is that it was better that they use it on pigs than on people. Others have concluded that it was to demonstrate his superior authority over the demons and to convince the people that the demons really had come out of the man. But we simply do not know. The one thing we can be sure of is that Jesus knew what he was doing. He knew that the time would come for Satan and his forces to be confined to the Abyss, and that time had not yet come. Perhaps we can all learn from this that when it’s unclear to us why God is allowing things to happen that we do not understand, he knows what he is doing. He knows the end from the beginning, and he is working all things together for our good because we are called according to his purpose.

14 Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. 15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. 16 Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man – and told about the pigs as well. 17 Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region.

In these verses we see the reaction of the people to this amazing miracle:

· Those who witnessed it were quick to tell others about it (v14, 16). This is not surprising. People are usually eager to talk about anything out of the ordinary.

· Those who heard about it went to see what happened (v14). This is not surprising either. People want to see for themselves. It’s just natural curiosity.

· When they saw the evidence for themselves they were afraid (v15). The reason for this is not so obvious. But people often instinctively fear anything they don’t understand, especially if it’s clearly supernatural. Even some Christians are afraid when the Holy Spirit is at work in a supernatural way. But we have no need to fear anything God does, because he loves us.

· They pleaded with Jesus to leave their region (v17). Despite the beneficial outcome for the man, and potentially for the whole region, they ask Jesus to leave. Who can understand the motivation behind people’s decision to reject Jesus? Perhaps they were not ready to face up to the implication for their own lives of Jesus’ lordship so clearly demonstrated by his supreme authority over the demonic powers.

18 As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon-possessed begged to go with him. 19 Jesus did not let him, but said, "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you." 20 So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed.

The people plead with Jesus to leave their region and Jesus gets into the boat. He does not stay where he is not welcome. But clearly the man he has delivered from demons wants to remain in his company, so he asks to go with him. No doubt he wanted to learn more from Jesus, and he certainly felt safe in his company. But Jesus says no. The miracle Jesus has performed is sufficient. The demons will not be back. And the man already knows enough to be able to tell others what the Lord has done for him. (Note the reference to Jesus’ deity here – compare how much the Lord has done for you with how much Jesus had done for him). He knows that Jesus is the Lord. He knows what he has done for him. He knows that he has had mercy on him. And that’s all we need to know to start to tell those nearest to about Jesus. Let's boldly proclaim the lordship of Jesus, how much he has done for us, and the mercy he has shown us.

View Details

Talk 13 Mark 4:35-41 Jesus calms the storm

Welcome to Talk 13 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today our subject is the well-known story of Jesus calming the storm. We’ll begin by reading Mark 4:35-41.

That day when evening came, he said to his disciples, "Let us go over to the other side." 36 Leaving the crowd behind, they took him along, just as he was, in the boat. There were also other boats with him. 37 A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped. 38 Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, "Teacher, don't you care if we drown?" 39 He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, "Quiet! Be still!" Then the wind died down and it was completely calm. 40 He said to his disciples, "Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?" 41 They were terrified and asked each other, "Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!"

So far Mark has given us several reasons why we should believe in the deity of Jesus. He takes Old Testament verses that refer to YAHWEH and applies them to Jesus (1:2-3). He records the words of the voice from Heaven saying to Jesus, You are my Son (1:11). Even the demons knew who he was – the Holy One of God (1:24). When the Pharisees accuse Jesus of blasphemy, asking the rhetorical question, Who can forgive sins but God alone? Jesus responds by saying that he has authority…to forgive sins (2:10) and demonstrates it by healing a paralysed man. He even claims to be Lord of the Sabbath (2:28). And now in the verses we have just read, he demonstrates his power over the forces of nature, leaving the terrified disciples to ask, Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!

So this passage may rightly be seen as further evidence of the deity of Christ. Who can calm storms but God alone? But the story also provides evidence of his humanity. He was asleep. Jesus was both fully man and fully God, a mystery that is beyond our human comprehension. But if my tiny mind could fully understand him, he could not possibly be God. So let’s just believe the biblical revelation of who he is and see how this passage applies to us today as we are confronted with the unexpected storms of life.

35 That day when evening came, he said to his disciples, "Let us go over to the other side." 36 Leaving the crowd behind, they took him along, just as he was, in the boat.

There were also other boats with him.

Let us go over…

When Jesus called his disciples his first words were, Follow me. So it’s not the disciples who take the initiative here. It’s Jesus who says, Let’s go over to the other side. At first sight this might sound like a suggestion, but it’s clear from Matthew’s account that it was much stronger than that. Matthew says that Jesus gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. The one who spoke the word in the beginning and said, Let there be light, now says, We’re going to the other side. No wonder then that, despite the storm, they arrived at the other side.

They took him along

Again, Matthew’s account is stronger. It says, his disciples followed him. Either way, it’s clear that they were obediently doing what Jesus asked them to. And bearing in mind what was about to happen it’s just as well that they took him along with them. When we’re seeking to follow the leading of the Lord Jesus, it’s important that we ensure that he is with us in every step we take.

There were also other boats with him.

Mark is the only Gospel that records this. The word used for boats here is slightly different from the word used for the boat Jesus was in. The KJV version suggests that they were smaller. If so, they would have been in even more danger from the storm but notice the words with him. Not with them. Jesus is the centre of attention, not the disciples. And the people in the other boats are with him too. The miracle Jesus performs benefits more than the select few. And the miracles he performs for us, in delivering us from the storms we find ourselves in, may very well benefit others too.

37 A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped.

Make no mistake about it. The problem they were facing was very real. Whatever problem you may be facing right now, it cannot be more serious than theirs was then. The disciples, who were fishermen and knew the lake well, recognised that they were in danger of drowning. In fact Luke’s account states clearly, they were in great danger. And to make matters worse, Jesus was asleep.

38 Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, "Teacher, don't you care if we drown?"

Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion.

As we’ve already said, Jesus was human and his sleep may well have resulted from the weariness that comes to us all when working hard. Preachers and teachers will understand very well what I mean, and if you have experience in ministering to the sick you will know how tiring it can be.

But Jesus’ sleep was not just a sleep of weariness. It was a sleep of faith. He had entrusted his life to his Father in Heaven and he knew that nothing could harm him. When we are asleep things are beyond our control, and when things are beyond our control it can take a lot of faith to believe that all will be well, especially in the middle of a storm.

But what do you do when God is asleep? Of course, God never goes to sleep (Psalm 121:3-4). But Jesus was God and Jesus was asleep. That’s part of the mystery of the incarnation that we mentioned earlier. For God to go to sleep he had to become a man. And as man Jesus was asleep, even though he was still God.

However, in trying to relate this part of the story to our own experience, perhaps we could say that there are times in the experience of every Christian when it feels like God is asleep. What should we do? Well, we could do what the disciples did and try to wake him up! Or we could just hold on tight and trust him to bring us through.

The disciples woke him and said to him, "Teacher, don't you care if we drown?"

The disciples chose the first option. They decided to wake him up. We do something similar when we hammer on the doors of Heaven and repeatedly plead for an answer. And there are times when it’s appropriate to do that – remember the parable of the unjust judge (Luke 18:1-6)? God understands when we feel the need to pray like that.

But in the light of Calvary, we can hardly accuse God of not caring! I wonder if perhaps it was Peter who asked the question. Years later it’s clear he had learnt his lesson. Not only could he sleep in the prison knowing that, like James, he could be executed the following day (Acts 12), but at a time when the church was facing intense persecution he could write to his fellow Christians to cast all their anxiety on Jesus, because he cares for you (1 Peter 5:7).

Yet at the time when the disciples woke Jesus up, it’s clear from their question that they believed that Jesus had the power to save them, but that they were doubting if he cared enough to do so! The fact that Jesus suggests in verse 40 that they still have no faith shows us that true faith is more than believing in God’s power to work a miracle.

39 He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, "Quiet! Be still!" Then the wind died down and it was completely calm. 40 He said to his disciples, "Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?"

Despite their lack of faith, Jesus works the miracle anyway! Note what he didn’t say. He didn’t say, I’m sorry guys. I’d have liked to have saved you, and I could have saved you, if only you had enough faith. As it is, I’m afraid you’ll have to drown… Of course he didn’t say that. Why? Because he did care. He did love them, and he had a purpose for their lives. And he does love you, and he does have a purpose for your life. Please remember:

GOD’S LOVE FOR YOU IS BIGGER THAN YOUR LACK OF FAITH.

The disciples didn’t need to wake Jesus up. He had said they were going to the other side and his word cannot fail. Believing in God’s power is not enough. Real faith trusts in his love for us. Interestingly, in Matthew’s account Jesus’ challenge to their faith comes before he calms the storm. Sometimes it’s the condition of our hearts that needs dealing with before the external conditions of the storm we are facing.

Putting Matthew’s and Mark’s accounts together, which are probably only a summary of the events that took place, it seems that Jesus addressed the subject of the disciples’ faith both before and after he calmed the storm. Following Jesus is an ongoing experience of learning more and more how much we can trust him. Our faith in him grows as we understand his faithfulness. His faithfulness will be your shield (Psalm 91:4).

41 They were terrified and asked each other, "Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!"

They were terrified

Why? They had already seen miracles. In fact he had already given them authority to cast out demons and to heal diseases. But this miracle was different. It clearly demonstrated more than ever who Jesus was. The truth was beginning to dawn on them. They were standing in the presence of DEITY.

Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!"

God had allowed the storm. It had happened for a purpose. The disciples’ experience of the storm was a step forward in their understanding of who Jesus was. The same is true of the storms in our lives. We may not understand their purpose, but that does not mean that there is no purpose. And when he brings us through the storm we find we have a deeper appreciation of Jesus.

And so they reached the other side.

Of course they did!

And they got out of the boat and sat down on the beach, opened their sandwiches and had a picnic.

Of course they didn’t!

That of course is typical of what we would like to happen. Surely when we’re through the next storm we’re entitled to a break! And that is what sometimes happens. But not on this occasion. Just look at what happened next:

Mark 5:1-4

They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him. This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain. For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him.

Oh no! Not another problem! Yes, and following Jesus brings with it all kinds of problems. Sometimes it seems like problem after problem. But with Jesus, there’s a solution for every problem. Jesus’ life was far from easy, and he faced many problems. And eventually he faced the greatest problem of all – Death on a cross.

No, that was not the problem. The cross was the solution. The problem was your sin and mine. But Jesus dealt with it once for all at Calvary. He took the punishment all our sins deserved and he died on that cross. But he couldn’t possibly stay dead. He had promised he would rise again! And he did. And to prove it he appeared to his disciples for a period of 40 days and then ascended into Heaven.

And one day soon, he’s coming back, and he will take us to the other side. And then there really will be a picnic!

View Details

Talk 12 Mark 4:1-33 Jesus teaches in parables

Welcome to Talk 12 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re in Mark 4 where Mark records three of the parables Jesus used as part of his teaching method. A parable is an illustration taken from everyday life and used to teach a spiritual truth. Its ultimate purpose is to make the truth clearer, but, as we shall see, sometimes people find it difficult to grasp the intention behind it. So we’ll not only be looking at the meaning of the parables in today’s passage, but also considering some problem verses which might seem to suggest that Jesus used parables in order to confuse people. But let’s begin by reading verses 1-9.

1 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water's edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said:

3 "Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times." 9 Then Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

Again we see Jesus teaching from a boat because of the size of the crowd that had gathered to hear him (cf. 3:9-10). Mark tells us here that he taught them many things in parables and in verses 33-34 we’re told that with many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them... and that in fact he did not say anything to them without using a parable. We’ll consider the reason for this a little later, but for now it’s sufficient to notice that the parables recorded in this chapter are just examples of Jesus’ preferred method of teaching.

The parable of the sower in verses 3-9 is fairly straightforward. Using the only method available to him at the time, a farmer scatters his seed and it falls on different types of soil and, depending on where it lands, it produces varied results. That’s it. But what does it mean? Of course we know the answer because we’ve probably already read Jesus’ explanation in verses 14-20. But if we hadn’t I doubt if we’d have understood it any better than the disciples.

We’ll come back to verses 10-13 in a moment, but first let’s look at Jesus’ explanation:

14 The farmer sows the word. 15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 19 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop – thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown."

The key to understanding the parable is found in verse 14. The sower sows the word. Once you understand that, the rest is relatively easy. Jesus’ explanation requires no further explanation. But perhaps it’s worth asking why Jesus told this parable in the first place. He gave his explanation to the Twelve whom he had chosen to send out to preach the word (3:14-15). So was he simply warning them and all preachers of the word ever since that their message would inevitably meet with a mixed reception? That must surely have been part of his intention. As we have seen in previous talks, he himself was receiving a very mixed reception to his message.

But his disciples were themselves hearers of the word before they became preachers of it. And the same is true of us. As hearers we need to make sure that our hearts are right if we are to be fruitful in his service. The parable applies not just to the initial time when we hear the message of the gospel, but whenever the word is preached. We must be careful not to let Satan take it away from us. We must not allow our hearts to become hardened. We must stand firm in times of trouble. And we must not allow worry or wealth or the desire for other things choke the word making it unfruitful.

And now, before we turn to the remaining parables in this chapter, we need to consider verses 10-13:

10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, "'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!' 13 Then Jesus said to them, "Don't you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable?

These verses present a very real problem because they appear to be saying that Jesus spoke in parables to those who were not his followers with the express purpose that they would not understand him, because if they did understand him they might turn from their sin and be forgiven. But could Jesus possibly have intended that? Surely not, but before we can give reasons for rejecting that conclusion, in seeking to answer this question we need to:

· bear in mind the overall teaching of Scripture

· examine the context of the passage from Isaiah that Jesus was quoting

· see how that relates to the context in which Jesus said it.

Firstly, then, the overall teaching of Scripture. This is totally contrary to the idea that Jesus deliberately taught in parables so that the people would not understand. God loved the world so much that he gave his only son so that whoever believes in him will not perish (John 3:16). God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). And Peter, of course, was present when Jesus originally spoke the words we are looking at. And it’s generally agreed that Mark gained most of the information for his Gospel from Peter’s eyewitness account of all that happened. So it’s hardly likely that Peter would have understood Jesus to mean what the verse at first sight appears to mean – that Jesus spoke in parables with the intention that people should not be converted!

Secondly, we need to examine the context of the passage from Isaiah that Jesus was quoting. Isaiah was called to prophesy that God was going to punish the people of Judah for their rebellion against him. They had disobeyed him time after time despite repeated warnings from God’s messengers the prophets. He would warn them again, but he knew from their past behaviour that they would not listen. They would hear him but not obey him. On this occasion forgiveness was not an option. God’s judgment was inevitable. It was the direct result of Judah’s persistent rejection of God. It came in 586BC when Nebuchadnezzar invaded and Judah went into captivity, away from her land (Jeremiah 52:27).

And thirdly, as we look at the context in which Jesus quoted these words from Isaiah, we see that things were not very different in Jesus’ day. He was repeatedly criticised and rejected by the Pharisees and teachers of the law. Even his own family misunderstood him. And, as we have seen in previous talks, although the people of Capernaum came in crowds to hear him, this did not lead to their repentance. The parable of the sower shows that it not the fault of the sower that some of the seed is not bearing fruit. It’s the kind of soil upon which it is sown. If the word is sown in fertile hearts it will grow, but there’s little point in continually attempting to reap a harvest from hearts of stone. So Jesus was quoting the words of Isaiah in a context where people were hardheartedly rejecting him. But if they would change their hearts the way to forgiveness would always be open, as it was for Judah after 70 years’ captivity in Babylon.

But how do we apply all this to ourselves? Every Christian should be a sower of the word. We should tell others about Jesus. But as we do so we’ll find that there are different levels of receptivity among the people we speak to, and, as in Jesus’ day, some will simply not want to know. Perhaps one day they will, but until then there’s little point in trying to nag them into believing. If they’re not yet ready, they won’t understand. Perhaps that’s why Jesus told his disciples:

If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave… and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them (Matthew 10:14, Luke 9:5),

something that Paul did in Acts 13:51 when the Jews in Pisidian Antioch rejected his message. What’s significant about this is not the actual shaking of dust off our feet – it’s symbolic significance would mean nothing to people today – but that Paul moved on elsewhere. If people’s hearts are hard perhaps we should prayerfully consider moving on to others whose hearts are softer.

But now let’s consider verses 21-34 which contain valuable truths about the growth of the kingdom of God. In verse 11 Jesus says that his disciples have been given the secret of the kingdom of God. It’s a secret because its truth is not immediately obvious. The kingdom of which Jesus was speaking was very different from the kind of messianic kingdom they were expecting. Now in verses 21-34 he shares three of the secrets of the kingdom:

· The kingdom of God grows as God’s people let their light shine

· The kingdom of God grows as God’s people spread the word

· The kingdom of God grows gradually

· The kingdom of God grows until the time for harvest has come.

The kingdom of God grows as God’s people let their light shine

21 He said to them, "Do you bring in a lamp to put it under a bowl or a bed? Instead, don't you put it on its stand? 22 For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out into the open.

Jesus says, Do you bring in a lamp to put it under a bowl or a bed? Instead, don't you put it on its stand? Matthew’s account makes clear what he is saying:

You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven (Matthew 5:14-16).

As Christians we have received the light of the glorious gospel of Christ. We are to let our light shine. And we do so by the way we live, by our good deeds.

The kingdom of God grows as God’s people spread the word

We’ve already seen from the parable of the sower that the sower sows the word (v14). This theme is picked up in verse 26 where Jesus says, A man scatters seed on the ground. But we can only sow God’s truth in the measure that we’ve received it. Look at 23-25:

23 If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear." 24 "Consider carefully what you hear," he continued. "With the measure you use, it will be measured to you - and even more. 25 Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him."

These verses relate to our reception of God’s truth. First we need to hear it. We need to consider it carefully. Then we need to use it, and the more we use it the more we receive. The motto of one Teacher Training College, when translated from Latin, was Teach that you may learn. Of course, we have to learn in order to teach. But it’s also true that the more you teach, the more you learn. So share what you do know of God’s truth and the Lord will give you more.

The kingdom of God grows gradually

This is clear from the two parables in verses 26-32.

He also said, "This is what the kingdom of God is like. A man scatters seed on the ground. 27 Night and day, whether he sleeps or gets up, the seed sprouts and grows, though he does not know how. 28 All by itself the soil produces grain – first the stalk, then the head, then the full kernel in the head. 29 As soon as the grain is ripe, he puts the sickle to it, because the harvest has come."

30 Again he said, "What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? 31 It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest seed you plant in the ground. 32 Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds of the air can perch in its shade."

The seed is sown. In time small shoots appear. It grows some more, and then, in God’s time – we don’t understand how – it develops into grain which eventually is ripe for harvest (vv26-29). The tiniest seed, given time, may surprise us with the size of the plant it becomes (vv30-32). When Jesus first spoke these words the disciples could not possibly have imagined how the small mustard seed of the kingdom would grow to be the worldwide church of today.

How has this happened? Because Jesus said he would build his church. Yes, he uses us to do it, but as Paul said when talking of how the Corinthians came to faith in Christ:

I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God who makes things grow (1 Corinthians 3:6-7).

It’s Christ who will build his church. But it’s our responsibility to sow the word and, like the farmer, patiently wait for the time of harvest.

The kingdom of God grows until the time for harvest has come

Jesus says in verse 29:

As soon as the grain is ripe, he puts the sickle to it, because the harvest has come.

We can apply this to our efforts at sowing the word in the lives of others. Paul tells us not to become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up (Galatians 6:9). But the final harvest will come at the end of the world. In Matthew’s Gospel, sandwiched between the parable of the sower and the parable of the mustard seed, Jesus tells the parable of the weeds (Matthew 13:24-30).

A farmer sows wheat in his field but at night an enemy comes and sows weeds. Rather than try to pull up the weeds straightaway, the farmer decides to wait until the harvest in case, in attempting to pull up the weeds, the wheat is damaged. At harvest time the wheat and the weeds are separated. The weeds are destroyed but the wheat is gathered into the barn.

In verses 37-43 Jesus explains the meaning of the parable.

The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels. 40 As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

In the light of this solemn statement, we must surely rejoice that Jesus, not the devil, has the final word, that good will finally triumph over evil, that there will ultimately be universal justice, and that the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Meanwhile, let us do all that we can to be faithful sowers of the word.

View Details

Talk 10 Mark 3:13-19 Jesus appoints the first apostles

Welcome to Talk 10 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’ll be considering Mark 3:13-19 where Jesus appoints his first apostles. I say his first apostles because there were, of course, later apostles mentioned in the book of Acts – Matthias, who was appointed to replace Judas, and, of course, the apostle Paul. I have gone into some detail about this in my book Body Builders where I also mention Barnabas and James, the Lord’s brother, who are just two others named as apostles in the New Testament, and argue that there is no reason why we should not expect to see the ministry of apostles at work in the church today. However, today I will not be repeating those arguments, but rather consider what we can learn from these verses about this important ministry.

13 Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him. 14 He appointed twelve - designating them apostles - that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15 and to have authority to drive out demons. 16 These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter); 17 James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder); 18 Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot 19 and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

13 Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him.

This verse teaches us important principles about how men and women are called to God’s service:

First, he calls those he wants

Actually, the translation wanted is rather weak. Those he wanted is literally whom he willed. In Acts 1:2 Luke refers to the apostles Jesus had chosen, or more literally, chosen out (i.e from among the rest). The call of God is rooted in the will of God. No doubt that’s why Jesus spent a night in prayer to God before appointing his apostles:

One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose (or picked out) twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles (Luke 6:12-13).

(Note, we’re not talking about salvation here. We’re talking about the call to apostleship. God is not willing that any should perish, and he calls everyone to be saved. But not everyone is called to be an apostle).

It’s not wrong to want to serve the Lord in a particular way (e.g. to desire to be a church leader - 1 Timothy 3:1), but no amount of wanting will make it happen if it’s not God’s plan for our lives. The gifts and ministries God distributes among his people are given as he determines (1 Corinthians 12:11) and it is God who places apostles in the church (1 Corinthians 12:28). And as Paul was to write later concerning his own apostleship, By the grace of God I am what I am (1 Corinthians 15:10).

Secondly, he calls those who are already disciples

It’s noteworthy that those he chose to be apostles were already his disciples. Mark has already told us how Jesus had called five of those named in this passage – Peter, Andrew, James, John, and Matthew – to follow him, and in the passage we’ve just quoted from Luke we’re told that Jesus picked out his apostles from among his disciples.

And indeed, we would hardly have expected anything else. A disciple is a committed follower, someone who is willing to learn, not just one of a curious crowd who has come to see the miracles. Jesus said that the test of a true disciple is if they hold to his teaching (John 8:31). It goes without saying, then, if anyone is to be an apostle, someone who is sent to spread the good news about Christ and speak with his authority, they must first be a disciple.

Thirdly, despite what we have just said, those he called to be apostles had not been his disciples very long

They were called at the outset of Jesus’ ministry. They had a lot to learn but Jesus called them when they were relatively young. The gifts and calling of God are not dependent on age. Paul told Timothy to let no one despise his youth (1 Timothy 4:12). There’s a danger that older Christians sometimes find it hard to accept the ministry of those who are younger, and, conversely, young Christians themselves can be tempted to feel that they’re too young to serve the Lord.

Speaking from personal experience, I accepted the claims of Christ when I was just fourteen years old and began preaching in the same year. Hopefully, my understanding of God’s word has increased considerably over the seventy years that have followed, but the gift enabling me to preach was there from the start. When I was still in my thirties God showed me that I would become the Principal of a Bible College, but I, along I suspect with many others, thought I might be too young. But it happened as God said it would. Don’t be surprised if the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers that Christ is still giving to his church (Ephesians 4:11) arise from the ranks of young people.

And, fourthly, those he called were willing to come

How do we know? Because they came to him. Jesus didn’t compel them. He called them. The choice was theirs. Even Paul, who could say that God had set him apart from his mother’s womb (Galatians 1:15), had a choice about it. In saying this he almost certainly had in mind what God said to the prophet Ezekiel:

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations (Ezekiel 1:5).

At first sight this seems as though Ezekiel had no choice about it, but as we read the rest of the chapter it’s clear from God’s warning not to disobey him that he did! Note that in this verse God knows Ezekiel before he creates him and appoints him. The key to understanding the mystery of God’s predetermined purpose for our lives is his foreknowledge. He chooses us in advance because he knows in advance that when he calls us, we will choose to follow him. God chooses us. Then he calls us. We respond. Then he appoints.

14 He appointed twelve - designating them apostles - that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15 and to have authority to heal diseases and drive out demons.

The main purpose of these verses is to reveal Jesus’ purpose in appointing apostles, and we’ll turn to that in a moment, but first it’s interesting to consider if there’s any significance in the number 12. And Matthew 19:28 may well indicate that there is:

Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

So the number of the twelve apostles corresponds to the number of the twelve tribes of Israel. Now is not the time to enter into lengthy discussion of all the possible implications of this verse, but it does seem that Jesus is here giving an early indication of what was later to become clearer in the rest of the New Testament that the true Israel is not comprised of the physical descendants of Abraham, but of his followers, whether Jew or Gentile, who would believe as Abraham believed. The church was to become the Israel of God (Galatians 6:15-16, cf. 1 Peter 2:9-10, Ephesians 2:11-16). And the apostles Jesus appointed were to have a special role in the coming kingdom of God – which, incidentally, seems to indicate that The Twelve were a unique group and should be distinguished from later apostles like Barnabas, Paul and James to whom I have already referred. (For more on this, please see Body Builders).

But now let’s turn to Jesus’ purpose in appointing these men. We saw in chapter 1 how Jesus came proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God (vv.14-15) and how he called the four fishermen to follow him, saying, Come, follow me, and I will make you fishers of men v.17). They were to follow Jesus and learn from him how to proclaim the good news, and in so doing win other disciples for him. This same purpose is now made clear as he chooses and appoints the twelve apostles. They are to proclaim the good news and demonstrate its truth by healing diseases and driving out demons. And as we look at these two verses in a little more detail we see four key principles. He appointed them:

· that they might be with him

· that he might send them out

· to preach (proclaim the good news)

· to have authority to heal diseases and drive out demons.

that they might be with him

Before he could ever send them out to preach it was vital that they should be with him. They had so much to learn. If they were to proclaim God’s truth, they must first learn what it is. However great a person’s communication skills, if what they’re communicating is not the truth, they’ll do more harm than good. These men were to spend three years learning from Jesus and would continue to learn after Jesus had left them as they were taught by the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-13).

We can apply this to ourselves in three main ways.

First, there is no substitute for spending time with Jesus if we want to be effective in his service. Secondly, if we’re called to full time service, a period of intensive training is highly desirable. And thirdly, we need continually and increasingly to be learning what the Holy Spirit is teaching us.

that he might send them out

The word that’s used for send here is apostello. The word that’s used for apostle is apostolos. An apostle is essentially someone who is sent. However, it’s important not to assume that every time the verb apostello is used in the New Testament it’s a reference to apostles. The word is used in a much more general sense to refer to anyone who is sent, as, for example, when Pilate’s wife sent a message to Pilate in Matthew 27:19. For more on this, please see Body Builders.

But with regard to the twelve that Jesus designated as apostles it’s clear that in the context apostolos is used in a much more specific sense. The word is sometimes used to refer to someone who is sent with a special commission and authority to represent someone else, rather like an ambassador who represents their country in another land, and that’s pretty much how it’s being used here. Paul certainly understood his apostleship in these terms for he saw himself as an ambassador for Christ imploring people on Christ’s behalf to be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:20).

But of course, we mustn’t limit the responsibility to be Christ’s ambassadors to those who are called to be apostles. We all have a responsibility to share the good news with others. He sends us out as ambassadors to tell others about the heavenly country to which we now belong and to represent our King as we live in a land which is not our real home, for our citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20). Why not ask God, Lord, who are you sending me to today?

to preach (proclaim)

The word translated preach here is the same as in Mark 1:14 referring to Jesus proclaiming the good news. I must confess that some of the ‘preaching’ I have heard falls very short of proclaiming. The word means to herald or to announce. That’s what Jesus did and the disciples were to do the same because he had given them authority to do so.

And it’s clear from the last chapter of Mark’s Gospel that the disciples got the message. Jesus told them to go into all the world and preach (proclaim) the good news to all… (v.15). He promised them that miraculous signs would accompany their message, and in verse 20 we’re told that they went out and preached (proclaimed) everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

to have authority to (heal diseases and) drive out demons.

The reference to healing diseases is not found in all manuscripts but is completely in harmony with both Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts. In Matthew 8:1 Jesus gives them authority to drive out impure spirits and to heal every disease and illness…

and in Luke 9:1-2 he gives them power and authority to drive out all demons and sends them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal those who were ill.

Taking these accounts together the message is clear. The good news of the kingdom of God is to be proclaimed and demonstrated with miraculous signs. This is to be done by those to whom Jesus has given the authority to do so. But does this apply to all Christians or only to those who are apostles? The answer is neither! It doesn’t apply to all Christians and it is not only for the apostles.

Why do I say this? First, it doesn’t apply only to apostles because it’s clear from Luke 10 that Jesus later appointed 72 others, who are not designated as apostles, and told them to heal those who are ill and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near you (Luke 9:9). What’s more, it’s clear from Acts 8 that Philip, who was not an apostle, but an evangelist exercised a similar ministry.

And secondly, we mustn’t assume that it applies to all Christians because Jesus gave this authority to a limited number of people, whose names are given in verses 16-19, and he gave it at a particular time during his ministry. For example, in Matthew 10:8 Jesus gave the twelve people named in verses 2-4 authority to raise the dead, but that doesn’t mean that I can claim it as a promise, because the promise wasn’t made to me. If I am to raise the dead I must have Jesus’ authority to do so. And since Jesus is no longer with us in bodily form that authority can only come through the leading of the Holy Spirit. That’s why, after Jesus left them, even the apostles, who had already worked miracles while Jesus was with them, had to wait for the coming of the Spirit to empower them and lead them.

So the passages we’ve been looking at don’t give us a set of promises that we can appropriate for ourselves, but they do give us a clear indication of the kind of things we can expect to happen as we are led by the Spirit. We should expect miracles to confirm the proclamation of the gospel, but they will only happen as we follow the principles we have seen in these verses. We must spend time with Jesus, we must go where he sends us, we must speak what he tells us, and, as he through the Spirit gives us the authority, we will see miraculous things happen to confirm the good news we proclaim.

For more on this important subject, please see Just a Taste of Heaven – a biblical and balanced approach to God’s healing power.

View Details

Talk 9 Mark 3:1-12 Defying the Pharisees and dealing with demons

Welcome to Talk 9 in our series on Mark’s gospel. Today we’ll be looking at Mark 3:1-12. In previous talks we have seen how Jesus came proclaiming the Kingdom of God (1:14-15) and demonstrating with miraculous signs his authority over demons and disease. In chapter 1 he casts an evil spirit out of a man in the synagogue at Capernaum, heals Simon's mother-in-law of a fever, and cures a man with leprosy, and in chapter 2 he heals a paralysed man, telling him first that his sins are forgiven.

We have also seen how his authority did not go unchallenged, particularly by the Pharisees, who understood full well the implications of the claims Jesus was making – his right to forgive sins, and to be the Lord of the Sabbath, which entitled him to heal on the Sabbath and to interpret the law of Moses very differently from them. Now, as we turn to the first six verses of chapter 3, we see Jesus once again antagonising his critics by healing on the Sabbath day.

Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shrivelled hand was there. 2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3 Jesus said to the man with the shrivelled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone." 4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent. 5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. 6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

1 Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shrivelled hand was there.

Mark doesn’t tell us which synagogue it was, but it may well have been the one in Capernaum again. The man’s disability would have made him unable to work, particularly if, as early tradition has it, he was a plasterer.

2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath.

Bearing in mind that there are no chapter divisions in the original text, some of them almost certainly refers to the Pharisees who had challenged Jesus at the end of chapter 2. They had clearly rejected his explanation of why his disciples were allowed to pick grain on the Sabbath, and would have hated his claim to be Lord of the Sabbath. To acknowledge the claims of Jesus would have undoubtedly required not only a massive shift in what they believed, but also a complete change in their lifestyle. People who are unwilling to repent will often look for a reason to find fault with Jesus – or with his followers as we saw in the last chapter.

3 Jesus said to the man with the shrivelled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone."

Why did Jesus say this? Did he want to draw attention to the miracle? By asking the man to stand up in front of everyone, he would certainly ensure that all those present would witness it. His miracles were signs validating his message about the kingdom of God and he longed for people to believe it. But at this early stage in his ministry, as we shall see later, it seems unlikely that Jesus would have called the man forward just to draw attention to the miracle.

Alternatively, from the question he asks next in verse 4, it seems possible that he did it as a direct challenge to the attitude and teaching of the Pharisees. What better way to expose their hypocrisy and to demonstrate the truth that the meeting of human need is more important than the ritualistic observance of the Sabbath, than to show his compassion by working a miracle of healing on the Sabbath day in front of the entire congregation?

But more probably, in my view, Jesus called the man forward for the benefit of the man himself. In the culture of the day, it would have been natural for people with disabilities to want to keep themselves hidden, partly because many people were revolted by any form of deformity, and partly because these afflictions were widely regarded as having resulted from personal sin. Here, as with the healing of the woman with curvature of the spine in Luke 13, Jesus’ calling the person to the front was a declaration that their disability was nothing to be ashamed of, and their years of embarrassment were now over. It would also encourage their faith.

4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.

So far the Pharisees have said nothing, but Jesus knows what they’re thinking, so he anticipates their challenge by asking them a question. The Pharisees had so many man-made rules about the Sabbath that it was virtually impossible to do anything! But to do nothing when someone is in need is to do evil. If anyone knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them (James 4:17). Jesus was the only sinless person who has ever lived, and because he had the power to heal the man it would have been wrong for him not to do it. But he not only committed no sin, he was also never guilty of a sin of omission. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil (Acts 10:38). Surely the Pharisees knew he was right, but they refused to admit it.

5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.

Notice the strong emotions of Jesus here. He is angry and he is deeply distressed. It’s not wrong to be angry. It’s right to be angry about injustice, about cruelty, about hypocrisy, about anything and everything that spoils the world we live in. And God is angry about sin because he loves us, and sin is the root cause of all that’s wrong in the world.

But here Jesus is not just angry. He is deeply distressed. He grieves over the hardness of human hearts, yes, even over the Pharisees’ stubborn hearts. His anger is mixed with love. He is distressed because he knows there is no hope for those who reject him. Hear the distress in his voice as he weeps over Jerusalem:

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing (Matthew 23:37).

The simple fact is, we all have a choice. To believe Jesus or not. The man with the shrivelled hand was completely and immediately made whole because he chose to believe Jesus. The Pharisees were lost because they chose not to.

6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

We don’t know why the Pharisees were so opposed to Jesus. Were they jealous of his popularity? Did they hate anyone who didn’t agree with their point of view? Was their social position threatened by Jesus’ radical teaching? Or did his responses to their criticism make them look stupid? Whatever the reason, their opposition reached a point where they began to plot how they could kill him. They were prepared to break the moral law contained in the Ten Commandments to defend their interpretation of relatively minor regulations regarding the observance of the Sabbath!

7 Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed. 8 When they heard all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon. 9 Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him. 10 For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him. 11 Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, "You are the Son of God." 12 But he gave them strict orders not to tell who he was.

The Jewish religious may have rejected him, but crowds of ordinary people were coming from far and wide because they heard all he was doing. Miracles, especially miracles of healing, always attract a crowd. We saw in chapter one how, when Jesus cast an evil spirit out of a man in the synagogue at Capernaum, news about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee (1:28). The people brought to Jesus all who are ill and demon possessed (1:32). After the healing of the leper the people came to him from everywhere (1:45). In chapter 2 they gathered in such large numbers that there was no room left… (2:2). And so it goes on throughout the earthly ministry of Jesus.

And it continues in the book of Acts where, in 1:1 Luke refers to the record in his Gospel of all that Jesus began to do and to teach. Through the ministry of his disciples Jesus was to continue to do and teach as they were empowered by the Holy Spirit. Miracles like speaking in tongues and healings drew thousands under the sound of the gospel. And they still do so today, except where cynicism and unbelief are rife in society (cf. Mark 6:5-6 where even Jesus could do no miracles in his home town because of their lack of faith).

Of course, as we have seen in previous talks, although miracles may draw the crowds, they do not necessarily lead to repentance. Some come out of curiosity, others because they are desperate for a solution to their problem, but not all are grateful, as we see in the story of the ten lepers. So, what is the purpose of miracles? They demonstrate God’s love and compassion. They manifest his power. They confirm the message of the gospel. They make it easier for people to repent and believe. And they vindicate God’s righteous judgment on all who, having experienced them, persist in their refusal to repent.

9 Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him.

This is not the only reference in the Gospels to Jesus teaching from a boat. The reason given here is to keep the people from crowding him. It would also have had the added advantage that more than those immediately next to him would be able to hear his message. Living by the sea I have often noticed on a calm day how much farther sound carries over water than on land.

It's interesting, too, that the disciples still had access to a boat. Perhaps Zebedee, the father of James and John was still in the fishing business. The fishermen had forsaken everything to follow him, but God still had a purpose for the knowledge and experience they had acquired before their conversion. Our natural talents, as well as any supernatural gifts he may entrust to us, can be very valuable in contributing to the spread of the message of the gospel.

10 For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him.

Of course, Jesus was not afraid to touch or be touched by people with diseases. We have already seen how he touched the man with leprosy without fear of contagion. But we also know that he was able to heal at a distance, something well understood by the Roman centurion In Matthew 8, and the Syro-Phoenician woman in Mark 7.

11 Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, "You are the Son of God."

Notice the word whenever. Jesus cast out many evil spirits, but they all, without exception, acknowledged who he was. And they knew that he had power over them:

What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One of God! (Mark 1:24 and Luke 4:34)

He shouted at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won't torture me! (Mark 5:7 and Luke 8:28)

They address him as Jesus of Nazareth, but they know that he is far more than a man from Nazareth. He is the Holy One of God. He is Son of the Most High God. They know that he has power to destroy them. As James, the Lord’s brother, tells us, Even the demons believe.., and shudder (James 2:19). Had James been present sometimes when Jesus had cast out demons and seen them cower before him? We don’t know, but whenever they saw him they fell down before him. And the day is coming when at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow… (Philippians 2: 9-11).

How did the evil spirits know who Jesus was? Because before Satan and his minions had rebelled against God and were cast out of Heaven they had known him as the Son of God through whom and for whom they were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers, or rulers or authorities, all things were created through him and for him (Colossians 1:16). No wonder they shudder in his presence.

12 But he gave them strict orders not to tell who he was

Jesus refused to accept the testimony of demons, even though what they were saying was true. Before we attempt to answer why, we need to bear in mind that it was not only demons that Jesus told to be silent. We’ve already seen in Mark 1:44 how he tells the leper he has healed, See that you don’t tell this to anyone. In 5:43 he tells Jairus not to let anyone know about how Jesus has raised his daughter to life. In 7:36, after the healing of the man who was deaf and had a speech impediment, he says the same thing. In 8:30 after Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Messiah, and in 9:9, after their experience of the transfiguration, he even tells his disciples not to tell anyone about him.

So, although, in the case of demons, Jesus may have ordered them to be silent as they were hardly reliable character witnesses, this would not account for why he told the people and his disciples to be silent. One explanation that’s frequently offer to this question, often referred to as the Messianic secret, is that if Jesus were openly identified as the Messiah the people would have probably attempted to crown him as their king, which was not, of course, in line with the reason he had come.

This may well be correct, but in my view another explanation is far more compelling. It’s clear that the restrictions Jesus imposed on his disciples were only temporary. In Mark 9:9, after his transfiguration, Jesus tells his disciples to tell no one who he was until he had risen from the dead. And in Acts 1:8 he tells them – and us – to be his witnesses to the ends of the earth.

So the restrictions he placed on telling others about him were temporary. But why? The answer surely lies in a combination of the two last points we have mentioned. The timing wasn’t right for the majority of people to know who he was, because if they did, they would want to make him the wrong kind of king and this could disrupt the years of training the disciples would need to fulfil their role of spreading the gospel after Jesus had returned to Heaven.

But that leads us to the subject of our next talk when we shall see how Jesus delegates his authority to the apostles he has chosen and gives them authority to heal the sick and cast out demons.

View Details

Talk 8 Mark 2:18-28 Jesus Questioned About Fasting and the Sabbath

Welcome to Talk 8 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 2:18-28 where Jesus answers questions about fasting and the Sabbath. As we shall see, these questions arose, partly from a genuine desire to know the answer, but more often from the critical attitude of the Pharisees who, like many people today, were only looking for a reason why they should NOT believe the claims of Jesus.

In the first part of this chapter, we saw the beginning of opposition from the Jewish religious leaders, especially the Pharisees. They question his right to forgive sins. They ask why he keeps company with tax collectors and sinners. Now they’re asking why his disciples don’t fast and why they’re breaking the law regarding the Sabbath. And in chapter 3, which we’ll look at next time, they look for an excuse to accuse him by watching to see if he will heal on the Sabbath day. They even start to plot about how they can kill him. It’s important to bear this overall context in mind as we consider the two issues raised in today’s passage which relate to the disciples’ behaviour with regard to (1) fasting and (2) the Sabbath.

Questions about fasting (vv18-22)

18 Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Some people came and asked Jesus, "How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?" 19 Jesus answered, "How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them. 20 But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast. 21 "No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse. 22 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."

18 Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Some people came and asked Jesus, "How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?"

Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting

Although regular fasting wasn’t part of the Law of Moses, by the time of Jesus it had become an important part of Jewish practice and was observed not only by the Pharisees but also by the disciples of John the Baptist. But the behaviour of Jesus and his disciples seemed to call into question the ceremonial law of the Old Testament and how it was currently interpreted and put into practice. In particular, it raised questions about fasting, and, as we shall see, the observance of the Sabbath (vv23-28 and 3:1-6).

Some people came and asked Jesus

The Greek just says, they came and said to him. So, in the context, the question is asked by John’s disciples and the Pharisees. Interestingly, Matthew (9:14) only mentions the disciples of John, and in Luke (5:33) it’s the Pharisees who asked the question. As we’ve already seen, the Pharisees were constantly looking for opportunities to catch Jesus out, but the motive of John’s disciples may well have been genuine.

They were probably fasting and mourning because John had already been imprisoned (1:14), and John would soon be taken from them.

How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?

Whatever the motivation behind it, the question is quite understandable. Why weren’t Jesus’ disciples fasting? Jesus’ replies by using three different analogies – a bridegroom, a patch of cloth, and a wineskin.

Vv19-20 The analogy of a bridegroom

19 Jesus answered, "How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them. 20 But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast.

To understand what Jesus is saying here we need to remember that in both Old and New Testaments God’s people are referred to as his bride. For example, Isaiah 62:5 God says:

As a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your God rejoice over you.

(cf. The parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25:1-14, and Revelation 21:2).

God is the bridegroom, and his people are his bride. So, in using this analogy and applying it to himself, Jesus is surely implying his deity. But that is not his primary purpose here. His main point is that the period that he was with his disciples was not a time for them to fast. Fasting was usually associated with repentance, sorrow and mourning. But, in leaving everything to follow him, Jesus’ disciples had already repented and the time of fellowship while he was with them was a time for joy, not sorrow. The time for sorrow and mourning would come when he was taken from them – an early indication that Jesus already knew that he would eventually die for their sins.

On that day (NIV) is literally in those days. This suggests that the time for sorrow and mourning after Jesus’ crucifixion would be limited. It would soon give place to the joy of resurrection and would hardly be true of the disciples after Pentecost. But that does not mean that there is no place for fasting today. It’s clear from the book of Acts (e.g. 13:1-3) that there are times when fasting is appropriate especially when it's accompanied by prayer.

But personally I see no clear basis in this passage for ritual fasting or for the observance of Lent, and although it’s right to remember regularly Christ’s suffering and death as we take communion (1 Corinthians 11:23-26), whatever the date on the calendar might be, I cannot help rejoicing in the knowledge that Christ is risen! If I mourn anything, it’s that my sin made his suffering necessary.

So the first part of Jesus’ answer to the question was that it was not the right time for his disciples to be fasting because they were enjoying fellowship with him while he was still with them. And, as we have seen, it also includes an implicit claim to deity and a prediction of his death.

But the second part of his answer, where Jesus uses two further analogies, makes another astounding claim. The kingdom of God which he had come to proclaim (1:14-15) could simply not be contained within the framework of Judaism. What Jesus had come to introduce was entirely new.

V21 The analogy of a patch of cloth

So in verse 21 Jesus says:

No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse.

The old garment of ceremonial Judaism was torn, but the new piece of Christ’s kingdom would only pull away from it, as it very quickly did as we see in Acts 15 with the church’s decision not to insist on circumcision for Gentile believers. The same point is made in verse 22 by Jesus’ use of the analogy of a wineskin.

V22 The analogy of a wineskin

And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."

Wineskins were watertight bags made from a goatskin. New wine was always put into new wineskins, because in time it would expand and stretch the bag. Old wineskins had already been stretched, and so if new wine were put into them, as the wine expanded it would only burst the wineskin. The lesson goes even further than the illustration of the patch of cloth. The new and the old are incompatible. Jesus had come to introduce something entirely new that would not only break free from the old (Judaism) and, if it didn’t, it would ultimately destroy it. But that brings us to verses 23-28 where Jesus is questioned about his disciples’ behaviour on the Sabbath.

Questions about the Sabbath (vv23-28)

23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?" 25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions." 27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

It wasn’t unlawful for the disciples to pick the heads of grain. This was explicitly permitted by the law of Moses for the benefit of the poor (Leviticus 19:9-10). But Exodus 34:21 did say that even in the time of harvest the people must rest on the Sabbath. This is presumably what the Pharisees had in mind. But what the disciples were doing was hardly harvesting.

It’s interesting that Jesus doesn’t get into a debate on the correct exegesis of these Old Testament verses – the Pharisees would probably have loved that – but he gets to the heart of the question, the purpose for which the law was given. It was given for the benefit of man.

The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (v27). All God’s commandments are given for our benefit. God loves us, and he knows what’s best for us. What matters is not the letter of the law, but its intention. This is made clear in verses 25-26.

25 "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."

This is a reference to 1 Samuel 21:1-6 where David clearly broke the letter of the law given by Moses in Leviticus 24:9. And Jesus condones his actions! But why? Didn’t Jesus say that he had not come to destroy the law but to fulfil it? Yes, but he also taught that love (for God and for one’s fellow man) is the fulfilment of the law. So David had acted correctly because he understood that human need must take precedence over ceremonial law. So, as we shall see next time, Jesus taught that the Sabbath was a day to do good (Mark 3:4).

27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

God created the Sabbath for our benefit, not his own. The laws about the Sabbath were given to ensure that God’s people took time to rest, did not exploit those who worked for them, and made time to worship the Lord – even the command to worship him was given for our benefit, not God’s.

It’s noteworthy that in the teaching of Paul, the question of observing the Sabbath was a made a matter of individual conscience (Romans 14) and it’s worth remembering that the Sabbath was the seventh day of the week (i.e. our Saturday), not Sunday which was and – despite the wrong impression created by modern secular calendars – still is the first day of the week. Nowhere does the New Testament refer to Sunday as the Sabbath.

I’m so glad that most churches have now broken free from the restrictions that used to be placed on what Christians were allowed to do on Sundays. For example, we were told that it was wrong to buy anything on a Sunday as that made other people work when they should have been in church. I well remember putting a coin in a vending machine to buy a bar of chocolate as a group of us were travelling to take the Sunday evening service in another church. I was quickly challenged by one of my friends who told me that I shouldn’t be buying anything on a Sunday. Of course, the rebuke was well intentioned, but rather like the Pharisees, they had forgotten the intention behind the rule. The only thing I was making work that Sunday was a vending machine! And, incidentally, as we were travelling by rail to get to our destination, there were real people who were working to make our journey possible. My friend hadn’t thought about that.

But that brings us to the final verse in the chapter.

28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath

Wow! What a claim! We have already seen how, by referring to himself as the bridegroom, Jesus has made an implicit claim to deity. But now the claim is far more explicit. Not only does he again use the messianic title, Son of Man, to refer to himself, but as the last Adam, the representative man who came to succeed where Adam failed, he claims to be Lord of the Sabbath.

In making this statement Jesus is claiming to be the ultimate interpreter of the entire law of the Old Testament. He has the last word on the subject. How often did he say, You have heard it said of old time… but I say unto you? To understand it correctly the Old Testament must always be read in the light of the New, and especially in view of the teaching of Jesus.

So let’s conclude by reminding ourselves of the indications of Jesus’ deity we have seen in Mark chapters 1 and 2.

In 1:1 he is introduced as Jesus Christ the Son of God

In 1:3 the quote from Isaiah identifies him as YAHWEH

In 1:11 God’s voice is heard from Heaven saying, You are my Son…

In 1:34 we’re told that the demons knew who he was

In 2:10 he demonstrates supernaturally his authority to forgive sins

In 2:19 he refers to himself as the bridegroom, a title used of God’s relation to his people in both Old and New Testaments

In 2:28 he declares himself to be The Lord of the Sabbath.

It’s clear that the Pharisees understood what Jesus was claiming. And, as we shall see next time, that’s why they wanted to kill him.

View Details

Talk 7 Mark 2:13-17 The Call of Levi

Welcome to Talk 7 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. We’ll begin by reading Mark 2:13-17.

13 Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them. 14 As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector's booth. "Follow me," Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him. 15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16 When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the "sinners" and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?" 17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

13 Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them.

As we saw last time, Jesus’ home was now in Capernaum (v1), a village on the western shore of Lake Galilee. We have also seen how, wherever Jesus went, large crowds gathered. There were two main reasons for this, his teaching and his healing. In Mark 1:22 we read:

The people were amazed at his teaching, because he taught them as one who had authority, not as the teachers of the law.

And in verses 27-28 we’re told that:

The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, "What is this? A new teaching – and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him." News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.

Mark goes into great detail about the miracles of healing and exorcism that Jesus performed, but he says relatively little about his teaching. Here in verse 13 he simply says, he began to teach them. However, as we’ve said before, the miracles were not the message, but served as signs confirming the truth of the message (cf. Mark 16:20). In Mark 1:14 Jesus proclaims the message that the kingdom of God is near and tells the people to repent and believe the good news. In 2:2 he speaks the word to them, and in verse 13 he teaches them. It’s clear that he used a variety of methods to communicate the message.

14 As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector's booth. "Follow me," Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him.

It’s important not to miss the connection with the previous verse. Jesus began to teach the people as he walked along. It’s so easy to think of teaching as something that you do in a standing (or sitting) position. But here Jesus is teaching as he walks along. A walk with someone is a great opportunity to share God’s truth with them. (When I was a Bible College principal I sometimes felt that I was able to teach my students more as I travelled in a car with them than when I was in the classroom).

It's interesting too that Jesus felt able to interrupt his teaching to speak to an individual and call him to follow him. The call of Levi (identified as Matthew in Matthew 9:9) is almost identical to the call of the four fishermen in chapter 1. Jesus is walking along, he sees them, and calls them to follow him. And immediately they do so.

But the fishermen were earning an honest living. As a tax-collector, Matthew almost certainly was not. The story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19 indicates that tax-collectors were certainly in a position to extract money under false pretences. And because of their reputation they were outcasts from Jewish society, being treated as traitors as they served the hated Roman authorities. They were viewed as the worst of sinners – but Jesus had come to call sinners to repentance, to seek and to save those who were lost (Luke 19:10).

So, Matthew gets up and follows him. As the fishermen had left their nets, he leaves his tax-collector’s booth (Luke 5:28 says he left everything), to become one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. I wonder if the other apostles were surprised at Jesus’ choice. There is certainly no suggestion that they were, and neither should we be when he calls people with a questionable background into church leadership today. What matters is not what they were, but what Christ can make of them when they repent.

15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.

Luke describes this meal as a great banquet. The angels in Heaven rejoice when a sinner repents (Luke 15:10) and it’s right that we should do so too. Overjoyed at his newfound salvation, Levi throws a banquet to celebrate in honour of Jesus. And perhaps he did it, too, to provide an opportunity for his former business associates to get to know Jesus. Those who have just found Christ have a unique opportunity to tell others about what he has done for them.

If we are really grateful for what Christ has done for us, we will do the same – at the ‘banquet’ we call the communion service or eucharist, where we regularly remember and celebrate the Lord’s death, and as we testify to those around us of the transforming work Jesus has done in our lives.

We also see in this verse how the sinless Christ was willing to look like a sinner (as he was at his baptism in 1:9) foreshadowing his redemptive work on the cross, where he who knew no sin became sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him (2 Corinthians 5:21). He mixes with those seen as the worst kind of sinners. But the fact is that we’re all sinners – or we were, until we met Jesus – and not one of us is worthy of his grace. The word Christian occurs only three times in the New Testament, but far more frequent is the use of the word saint to refer to Christian believers. We who were once sinners God now calls saints. What amazing grace!

16 When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the "sinners" and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"

Despite the miracle performed on the paralysed man earlier in the chapter, the teachers of the law are still criticising Jesus. Now the question is not, What right has he to forgive sins? but Why is he eating with sinners? Did these Pharisees really think that they themselves were sinless? Probably not, but they certainly considered themselves a cut above the rest. Jesus’ story of the Pharisee and the tax-collector illustrates their attitude perfectly:

To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men – robbers, evildoers, adulterers – or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.' But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.' I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18:9-14).

Of course, Jesus didn’t condone sin, but he mixed with sinners because their need was so great, and he loved them and sought to save them. Luke 7:36-50, where Jesus is in the home of Simon the Pharisee and where a woman who has lived a sinful life anoints Jesus’ feet with perfume, also illustrates what we’re talking about here. The Pharisee can’t understand why Jesus would allow a sinful woman to touch him, making him ceremonially unclean. Jesus explains that those who love him most are those who have the most to forgive. He tells the woman, Your sins are forgiven… your faith has saved you. Go in peace.

17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners (to repentance)."

Jesus’ message was that people should repent and believe the good news (1:15). This is what he came for. Of course we know that we have all sinned (Romans 3:23) and everybody needs to repent and believe the gospel. So Jesus is not suggesting here that the Pharisees were righteous and did not need to repent. But if no one is righteous then everyone, including the Pharisees, needs to repent and receive the forgiveness Jesus so freely offers. It’s true that the healthy do not need a doctor, but if everyone is sick, then everyone needs him.

Note, incidentally, that, although in the context this was not his intention, Jesus here acknowledges our need of the medical profession. Some Christians, because of God’s promises of healing, believe that to consult a doctor is an evidence of lack of faith. The people who take this view are usually those who believe that Jesus died for our sicknesses in exactly the way that he died for our sins. Both in my PhD thesis and in my book Just a Taste of Heaven, I show that this is not what the Bible teaches and that to teach this is not only erroneous but also potentially dangerous.

Although this is not directly relevant to the context of the passage we are studying in Mark 2, because it’s so important, I will conclude this talk by giving you a brief summary of why I believe it’s quite appropriate for us to seek medical help and advice, even though we passionately believe in the supernatural power of God to heal the sick today.

Firstly, it is noteworthy that on at least three occasions the New Testament actually advocates the use of medicinal means. One clear example, is Paul 's recommendation to Timothy to take wine for the sake of his stomach (1 Timothy 5:23). A further example is the instruction given to the church at Laodicea to purchase eye salve that they might see (Revelation 3:18), and although the use here is clearly metaphorical it seems hardly likely that such a metaphor would have been employed if the use of medical means were disapproved of.

Yet another example is the use of oil and wine in the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37). In v.33 the Samaritan takes pity on the wounded man and in v.34 dresses his wounds , pouring on oil and wine. He then takes him to an inn where he takes care of him. It is clear from the context that the purpose of the oil and the wine was medicinal and Jesus commands his followers to Go and do likewise (v.37).

Furthermore, there is no clear evidence in either the Old or the New Testament of a negative attitude towards the use of medicine. In fact, as we’ve just seen, there are indications of a positive attitude. This suggests that as Christians today we too should be positive about it and be grateful to God for the advances in medical science that have been made since Bible times.

But given that the use of medicine and the medical profession is appropriate for a Christian, the question arises as to when we should avail ourselves of it, bearing in mind that God has promised to heal us. In this connection it is important to realise that it need not be a question of God or medicine. It can, and probably should, be a matter of both. As Christians we should seek the Lord in everything, so we should not, like Asa (2 Chronicles 16:12) , consult the doctor and forget the Lord. On the other hand, we should remember that God works through the natural as well as through the supernatural . It would seem foolish to ask God for a miracle when there is a simple natural solution.

A good illustration of this principle is God ’s miraculous provision of food for the Israelites when they were travelling through the desert. Exodus 16 reveals how God provided ‘manna’ as food for his people. There was always enough for each day …until they came to a land that was settled; they ate manna until they came to the border of Canaan (v.35). This is confirmed in Joshua 5:12. The manna stopped the day after they ate food from the land; there was no longer any manna for the Israelites, but that year they ate the produce of Canaan.

The lesson from this is very clear. God has many natural ways of providing for the needs of his people. It is when our needs are beyond our natural resources that we may expect God to provide supernaturally. God does not work miracles when there is no need for them. Applying this principle to healing, since we are to pray continually (1 Thessalonians 5:17), we should pray as soon as we are ill and continue to pray until we are better. But that does not mean that we should not consult a doctor or take medicine. Indeed, in most cases it seems that it is through medical means that the Lord chooses to heal us. Where human skill is insufficient, however, as Christians we have the assurance that even when something is impossible with man, all things are possible with God .

View Details

Talk 6 Mark 2:1-12 Jesus Heals a Paralysed Man

Welcome to Talk 6 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re in chapter 2 and we’ll be looking at the first 12 verses to which the NIV gives the heading, Jesus heals a paralysed man. And that indeed is what the story is about. It’s about Jesus, it’s about healing, and it’s about a man who could not walk. But, as we shall see, it’s about far more than healing. So let’s read it.

A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home. 2 So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them. 3 Some men came, bringing to him a paralysed man, carried by four of them. 4 Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus and, after digging through it, lowered the mat the paralyzed man was lying on. 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralysed man, "Son, your sins are forgiven." 6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" 8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to the paralysed man, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...." He said to the paralysed man, 11 "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home." 12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this!"

So, as we’ve said, this passage is about healing, but it teaches us far more than that. It teaches us about who Jesus is, about the seriousness of sin and the importance of forgiveness, about faith, and about different groups of people and their attitude to Christ. We’ll work through it a verse or two at a time and then summarise the lessons we have learned.

1 A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home.

As we saw last time, Jesus had extended his ministry beyond Capernaum, travelling throughout Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and driving out demons (1:39). Now he returns to Capernaum, which this verse refers to as home. When the people hear this there’s an immediate effect:

2 So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them.

The house is filled with people and they overflow into the street. As we saw in chapter 1, it was his miracles of healing and exorcism that attracted the crowds, but Jesus’ primary purpose was to preach the word to them. His miracles were not the message. They were signs confirming the truth of his message – The good news of the kingdom of God (1:14). Compare Mark 16:20 (the very last verse of Mark’s Gospel):

Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

3 Some men came, bringing to him a paralysed man, carried by four of them.

Notice the extremity of the man’s condition. He was paralysed. He was clearly unable to get to Jesus without considerable help. He wasn’t walking with a man on either side supporting him. It took four men to carry him there.

4 Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus and, after digging through it, lowered the mat the paralyzed man was lying on.

These men were clearly determined to get their friend to Jesus. And, as the next verse reveals, they were clearly men of faith. What would be the point of going to all that trouble if you didn’t believe that Jesus would work a miracle?

5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralysed man, "Son, your sins are forgiven."

Jesus saw their faith. This could mean the faith of the four men, or it could include the faith of the paralysed man himself. He certainly exercised faith in obeying the command of Jesus to get up and walk. But, either way, it wasn’t just his faith. In my book, Just a Taste of Heaven, I have a chapter on the relationship between faith and healing. As I examined the passages in the New Testament where faith is mentioned in connection with healing, I discovered that in half the cases it was the faith of the sick person that resulted in healing, and in the other half it was the faith of someone else. In fact it’s the person bringing the request for healing who is expected to have faith. Later, in Mark 6:5-6, we’re told that Jesus was unable to do any mighty work in his home town because of their unbelief.

But why does Jesus say, Son, your sins are forgiven, before he heals this man? Three possibilities come to mind:

a. The man’s sickness was the result of his sin

b. The man believed that his sickness was the result of his sin

c. Jesus wanted to emphasise that the forgiveness of sin is far more important than the healing of the body.

With regard to a. This is certainly a possibility. The Bible makes it clear that sickness is sometimes the result of personal sin, but both Old and New Testaments are equally clear that this is by no means always the case. (For more on this, please see the relevant chapter in Just a Taste of Heaven).

Regarding b. Even if his sickness was not caused by sin, the man may very well have believed that it was, because this was the common view at the time. I’ve heard it suggested that Jesus just wanted to reassure the man by putting such thoughts out of his mind. But if that had been his intention, would it not have been easier to say, Son, this sickness has not been caused by your sin?

Surely it’s much more likely that Jesus simply wanted to emphasise that the forgiveness of sin is far more important than the healing of the body. The effects of sickness may last for a lifetime. Sin has eternal consequences.

6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"

Well, they certainly got one thing right. Ultimately it’s only God who can forgive sin. Of course, we can, and we must, forgive those who sin against us, but every sin against man is a sin against God. For example, I can forgive you for stealing from me, but in stealing from me you have broken God’s law, You must not steal. All sin is an offense to God, and it’s only God who can give ultimate forgiveness.

So the teachers of the law were right about that. But what they failed to see was that Jesus was not blaspheming, because Jesus WAS God. And that’s exactly what Jesus is claiming when later he says, the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins (v10). Their fundamental problem was that their attitude to CHRIST was wrong. Note how they refer to him as this fellow. Their preconceived ideas blinded them to who he was.

8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things?

While Jesus was a man here on earth, he did not know everything. (See Mark 11 where he expects to find fruit on a fig tree when there was none). But he received supernatural revelation through the Holy Spirit, as we sometimes do through spiritual gifts like what is often referred to as a word of knowledge. So the fact that he knew what they were thinking is not, in my view, a proof of his deity, but it is a sign of the truth of what he was saying.

9 Which is easier: to say to the paralysed man, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'?

The point here is verifiability. No one could verify the statement that the man’s sins were forgiven, but if gets up and walks, the integrity of Jesus’ words is immediately verified. In other words, it’s easier to say that a person’s sins are forgiven, because there’s no immediate way of knowing if it’s true. It’s much harder to say, Get up and walk, because everyone will immediately see whether he does so or not.

10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...." He said to the paralysed man, 11 "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home."

In healing the paralysed man Jesus demonstrates his authority to forgive sins and in so doing demonstrates his deity. The term Son of Man is a Messianic title. The signs he performed confirmed that he was indeed the Messiah, God’s anointed one. This passage shows the urgent priority Jesus placed on forgiveness – he even wanted to forgive the critics, if only they would believe (v 10, that you may know…). It also indicates his willingness to die for us. It was his claim to deity that led to his crucifixion.

12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this!"

This astounding miracle resulted, first, in amazement. This is one of the main purposes of miracles. They are signs and wonders. They are designed to make man wonder, to think and to ask, What does this mean? (as, for example, the miracle of tongues at Pentecost).

It also resulted in praise to God. But God is looking for more than praise. He’s looking for repentance. Jesus’ message was Repent and believe the good news (1:15). And, as we’ve seen in previous talks, it’s clear from Matthew 11:23 that, despite the miracles, Capernaum did not repent.

So now let’s try to summarise some of the lessons we have learned from this passage.

· What we learn about healing, sin and forgiveness

· What we learn about people

· What we learn about Jesus

What we learn about healing, sin and forgiveness

Jesus has power to heal incurable diseases

Jesus heals in response to faith

Jesus makes it clear that sickness, however serious, is not our greatest problem

Sin is more serious than sickness

What we learn about people

Some people come to Jesus because they’ve heard what he can do

Some people come to Jesus because of their desperate need

Some people come to Jesus because they care about their friends or family

Some people reject Jesus and only want to criticise

What we learn about Jesus

Jesus knows the thoughts of our hearts

Jesus is God himself and only Jesus has authority to forgive our sins

Jesus loved us enough to die for us – his claim to deity was why they crucified him

View Details

Talk 5 Mark 1:29-45 Miracles of healing in Capernaum and beyond

Welcome to Talk 5 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’ll be looking at Mark 1:29-45. We’ll begin by reading verses 29-31.

29. As soon as they left the synagogue, they went with James and John to the home of Simon and Andrew. 30. Simon's mother-in-law was in bed with a fever, and they told Jesus about her. 31. So he went to her, took her hand and helped her up. The fever left her and she began to wait on them.

As we saw last time, Jesus has just cast a demon out of a man in the synagogue. He and his disciples now leave the synagogue and go to the home of Simon and Andrew. This passage gives us an interesting insight into family life at the time. Although Simon was married, his brother Andrew was living with them, and so was his wife’s mother. For the extended family all to live under the same roof was normal at the time and is not uncommon in some parts of the world today. This may well account for the fact that, later in his ministry, Simon Peter, also known as Cephas, was able to take his wife with him on his apostolic travels, as did some of the other apostles (1 Corinthians 9:5).

However, more important than the social conditions prevailing at that time, is the miracle of healing so briefly described in the verses. Simon’s mother-in-law is in bed with a fever. They tell Jesus. He responds immediately, goes to her, takes her hand, and helps her up. She is healed straightaway and is able to wait on them. So Jesus’ response to the need is immediate and so is the healing.

Interestingly, in Matthew’s account of this miracle, Jesus simply touches her hand (Matthew 8:15), and in Luke we’re told that he bent over her and rebuked the fever and it left her (Luke 4:39). Of course, the differences in these accounts are not contradictions. They complement each other and give us the full picture. They all show his willingness and power to heal. Sometimes Jesus healed with a touch, at others with a word of command. In this case he does both. I have often preached about his miracle, usually from the passage in Matthew, and have commented that in many ways his word is synonymous with his touch. He touches us with his word.

On one such occasion, in March 2009, on a visit to Portugal where I was teaching for a week in Mount Hope Bible College near Lisbon, I was asked to do a weekend of teaching in a place called Tomar. On the Sunday morning I was preaching about the power of Jesus and how He healed people just by touching them. I explained that today He often ‘touches’ us through the message that is preached and that He could touch and heal people now, even while I was preaching. While I was saying this, I noticed a woman in the second row who was quietly crying.

As soon as the service ended, this woman came to me and spoke to me. She did so through an interpreter as I don’t speak Portuguese. She insisted on showing me the lower part of her leg which for some time had been very swollen, had caused her great pain, and which had been greatly discoloured. Her friend, who interpreted for her confirmed that this was true. However, during my preaching the swelling had gone down completely, the discolouration had disappeared, and she was no longer in pain. Her tears were tears of joy! She pulled up her trouser leg and revealed a perfectly normal ankle. There was no evidence that she’d ever had a problem.

That evening after sunset the people brought to Jesus all the sick and demon-possessed. 33. The whole town gathered at the door, 34. and Jesus healed many who had various diseases. He also drove out many demons, but he would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was.

We saw last time that in verse 28, after Jesus had driven out the demon in the synagogue, the news spread quickly throughout Galilee. This is demonstrated by the immediate effect on the people of the town. In fact, the whole town gathered at the door. It’s understandable that people who are suffering will flock to someone who is able to meet their need, but sadly this does not always lead to genuine conversion, as the story of the ten lepers in Luke 17:11-19 makes clear. And, as we saw last time, the miracles Jesus performed in Capernaum did not bring the people to genuine repentance.

In the New Testament, miracles almost invariably attracted the attention of the crowds, and the same is generally true today, though their effect seems to vary in different cultures. For example, in Africa multitudes used to gather at the evangelistic and divine healing crusades conducted by Reinhard Bonnke, but I know from personal experience and acquaintance with him that the effects of his ministry were considerably less in Europe. Rather as in the ministry of Jesus, the Lord could do no mighty work because of the scepticism and even cynicism in the region, although he did lay his hands upon a few sick people and heal them (Mark 6:5).

Despite this, Jesus healed many who had various diseases. He also drove out many demons. We’re told in verse 41 and elsewhere that he did this because of his compassion (Matthew 14:14, 20:34, Mark 1:41, 5:19, 9:22, Luke 7:13). In healing the sick he demonstrated the love of God, even for those who were ungrateful, just as later he died for the sins of the whole world even though he knew that many would reject him.

In verse 34 Mark tells us that Jesus drove out many demons, but he would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was. We have already seen one example of this with the demon-possessed man in the synagogue (vv24-25). Jesus tells the demon to be quiet because it knew who Jesus was – the holy one of God. James 2:19 shows us that even the demons believe – and shudder. They believe, but they do so grudgingly. Jesus silences all such testimony. He looks for a voluntary and glad acceptance of who he is, as the truth is revealed by the Spirit of God to those who repent and come to faith in him as their Saviour.

Finally, in Matthew’s account of these miracles (8:17), he says that Jesus performed his healings

…to fulfil what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases."

This is one of the ‘proof-texts’ used by those who believe that Jesus died for our sicknesses in just the same way that he died for our sins. However, as I have argued in detail in my PhD thesis, and in a more simplified way in my book, Just a Taste of Heaven, whenever Matthew quotes the Old Testament he does so in connection with the events in Jesus’ life and ministry that he is there and then recording, not to something that will take place later. And in Matthew 8:16-17 he uses the quote from Isaiah in connection with Jesus’ healing ministry in Galilee, not in the context of his atoning work on the cross, which took place three years later. So, as we’ve already seen, Jesus’ miracles are best understood as signs of the kingdom of God. They confirm the truth of the gospel message as they demonstrate God’s power and his loving compassion for those who are sick.

Very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus got up, left the house and went off to a solitary place, where he prayed. 36. Simon and his companions went to look for him, 37. and when they found him, they exclaimed: "Everyone is looking for you!" 38. Jesus replied, "Let us go somewhere else – to the nearby villages – so I can preach there also. That is why I have come." 39. So he traveled throughout Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and driving out demons.

Verse 35 undoubtedly reveals the key to Jesus’ power. Although he was the Son of God (v1), and although he had been baptised in the Spirit (v10), he still needed to spend time alone in communion with God. He got up very early, he found somewhere to be alone, and he prayed. It was surely on these occasions that he received revelation from God about everything he was to do. In John 5:19, after he has healed the man at the pool of Bethesda on the Sabbath day, he says:

I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

This surely makes it clear that even Jesus could not tell God what to do. And we, as his disciples are to follow his example. We are God’s servants. He dictates the agenda. If we are to be used in healing, as Jesus was, we must first hear what God is saying. The level of our authority is directly related to the extent to which we are hearing what God has to say.

But these verses also give us an insight into two other aspects of public ministry:

(1) the external pressure of both the disciples and the general public demanding attention (36-37), and

(2) the inward pressure of one’s personal conviction of God’s call and purpose for our lives (38-39. Cf. also v45).

God’s call to serve him is what should motivate all we do, but if we are to be effective in his service we must find the right balance between spending time with him and responding to the inevitable demands made by our fellow Christians and the desperate need of those who do not yet know Jesus. This is probably the most important reason why we need to follow closely the example of Jesus in seeking to win others for him.

And finally in verses 40-45 we have the account of the healing of the leper.

40. A man with leprosy came to him and begged him on his knees, "If you are willing, you can make me clean." 41. Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" 42. Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured.

There are several points of interest here. First is the fact that the leper came to Jesus. This was unusual in that lepers were required to keep their distance due to the highly contagious nature of the disease. Perhaps his boldness in doing so can be accounted for by the fact that he had presumably heard of the miracles Jesus had already performed and that, like the four lepers in 2 Kings 7, he felt he had nothing to lose.

Secondly, what he says makes it clear that he did not doubt Jesus’ ability to heal him, but that he was unsure of Jesus’ willingness to do so. I’ve often heard it said that to be healed we must not only have faith that God can heal us, but also that he will. But that is clearly not the case. Jesus healed the leper despite his lack of faith in his willingness to do so. But Jesus’ words of reassurance – I am willing – are surely an encouragement to us all. This is the only case in the Bible where someone prays in effect, Lord, heal me if it is your will. And Jesus replied, I am willing. In the light of this, and the fact that Jesus never refused healing to anyone who came to him, we should surely continue to expect healing, at least until he shows us that there is a reason for his not doing so (as in the case of Paul’s thorn in the flesh in 2 Corinthians 11 where the apostle was told that God’s grace would be sufficient for him).

Thirdly, Jesus’ motive for healing the leper was compassion. Ignoring social convention and the danger both of catching the disease and of being made ceremonially unclean, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man – because he loved him. And we’re reminded, as we saw in an earlier talk, of Jesus’ willingness to be baptised even though it made him look as though he was a sinner who needed to repent. These things all foreshadow – they are a prophetic picture – of all that Jesus was to do on the cross. Although he never sinned, he was willing for God to treat him as a sinner so that he could make us acceptable to God (2 Corinthians 5:21 CEV). And he did so because he loves us.

Fourthly, please notice that the healing was immediate. Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured (v42). In the Gospels Jesus’ healings were almost always immediate. There is little evidence for miracles of gradual healing. Admittedly, in Mark 8:22-26 the healing of the blind man was not instantaneous, and the ten lepers who came to Jesus for healing were all healed, but it was only as they set off to see the priest as Jesus commanded them that on their way they were healed (Luke 17:14).

However, it’s clear from the context that these healings occurred almost immediately or at least very soon after Jesus had ministered to those who were suffering. This does not mean of course that God may not sometimes have a purpose in gradual healing today, but healings really need to be immediate if they are to fulfil their purpose as manifestations of the kingdom of God and as signs confirming the truth of the good news of the gospel.

Jesus sent him away at once with a strong warning: 44. "See that you don't tell this to anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing, as a testimony to them." 45. Instead he went out and began to talk freely, spreading the news. As a result, Jesus could no longer enter a town openly but stayed outside in lonely places. Yet the people still came to him from everywhere.

Why did Jesus tell him not to tell anyone about his healing? Because he didn’t want people to come to him simply for the physical benefits they could get. He had compassion on the sick and never refused healing to anyone who asked for it, but he didn’t go looking for the sick and the demon possessed. He didn’t advertise his healings – nor did the apostles in the book of Acts – his miracles advertised him! His priority, as we have seen was to take time to hear what his heavenly Father was saying.

So he tells the man he has healed to obey the Law of Moses in Leviticus 14 for the priest to examine him and confirm the healing. We might have thought that the man would have gladly obeyed Jesus’ instructions out of sheer gratitude, but instead he does the opposite! We’re not told why, but whatever the reason, his enthusiasm to tell his story didn’t help the cause of the kingdom of God. The proclamation of the good news of the kingdom of God is demonstrated with miraculous signs and wonders, but his kingship does not take away our freedom of choice or our responsibility to obey him. And surely the greatest evidence that Jesus is Lord is in the obedient lives of those who profess to follow him. If we want Christ’s kingdom to be extended, we must do things his way.

And finally, seven key points to summarise what we’ve been saying:

(1) Jesus’ authority to heal sprang from the time he spent in communion with God and his obedience to what God revealed to him.

(2) The purpose of Jesus’ healings was to confirm the good news of the kingdom of God and to show his compassion for suffering humanity.

(3) His healings, as signs of the kingdom, were immediate rather than gradual.

(4) Jesus healed by a word of command, or by a touch, or by both.

(5) While his healings brought multitudes under the sound of his teaching, relatively few became true disciples.

(6) Despite this, his willingness to be identified with suffering and sinful humanity foreshadowed what was to happen at Calvary.

(7) His willingness and power to heal all who came to him, like his willingness and power to save all who come to him, were no guarantee that all would come. But he heals and he saves anyway, because he loves us. The choice is ours, whether we come to him or not.

View Details

Talk 4 Mark 1:21-28 Jesus Drives Out an Evil Spirit

Welcome to Talk 4 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’ll be looking at Mark 1:21-28. So far we have seen how Mark introduces us to the good news about Jesus who is the Son of God. He tells us of the preaching of John the Baptist whom God sent to prepare the people for the coming of Jesus. His message was Repent and be baptised.

He tells us of Jesus’ baptism in the River Jordan and how, immediately after his baptism in water, where God declared him to be his beloved Son in whom he was well pleased, he was baptised in the Holy Spirit and equipped with power to fulfil his God-given mission.. This was to be the time when Jesus would start his public ministry, and after a period of fasting in the desert where he conquered Satan’s temptations, he began preaching the good news of the kingdom of God evidenced by miracles of healing and deliverance.

We saw how Jesus called the four fishermen, Andrew, Simon, James and John, and we saw through the example of Jesus, and the response of the disciples to his call, key principles of how to win other for Jesus.

Now in today’s passage, and in the rest of the chapter, Mark gives us examples of what proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God actually means in practice:

21-28 Jesus Drives Out an Evil Spirit – a miracle in the synagogue

29-31 Jesus heals Simon’s mother-in-law of a fever – a miracle in a home

32-34 Jesus heals all the sick and demon possessed – miracles outside

35-39 Jesus spends time in prayer

40-45 Jesus heals a leper.

But today we’ll just be looking at verses 21-28 where Jesus delivers a demon possessed man in the synagogue in Capernaum.

21-28 Jesus Drives Out an Evil Spirit – a miracle in the synagogue

They went to Capernaum, and when the Sabbath came, Jesus went into the synagogue and began to teach. 22. The people were amazed at his teaching, because he taught them as one who had authority, not as the teachers of the law. 23. Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit cried out, 24. "What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One of God!" 25. "Be quiet!" said Jesus sternly. "Come out of him!" 26. The evil spirit shook the man violently and came out of him with a shriek. 27. The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, "What is this? A new teaching – and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him." 28. News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.

21 They went to Capernaum

After Jesus has called the four fishermen to follow him they go to Capernaum. Capernaum was a small town on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee.

It’s probably where the four fishermen were living. If you go there today you can see the remains of what is believed to be the house where Simon Peter lived and the synagogue where Jesus preached.

and when the Sabbath came

So they came to Capernaum and it seems that they stayed there for a few days, at least until the following Sabbath.

Jesus went into the synagogue and began to teach.

We know that it was Jesus’ custom every Sabbath to attend the synagogue (Luke 4:16), where, like any other adult Jewish male, he had the right to teach. But his teaching was different!

The people were amazed at his teaching, because he taught them as one who had authority, not as the teachers of the law.

It was the custom of the rabbis in those days to be constantly quoting the opinions of others, but Jesus spoke with an authority that came from Heaven. This undoubtedly sprang from who he was, the Christ, the Son of God (v1), but at a human level, resulted from the time he spent in prayerful communion with his heavenly Father (cf. v35).

In teaching and preaching in this way, he was not only instructing the congregation in the synagogue, but also setting an example to his disciples, and us, as to how the kingdom of God should be proclaimed (cf. v14). He was showing them how to become fishers of men. Of course, there is a time and place for giving a reasoned explanation for why we believe what we believe (1 Peter 3:15), but, as the apostle Paul discovered, the enticing words of man’s wisdom are no substitute for preaching with the demonstration and power of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:1-4). This is nowhere more evident than in the reaction of the people to Jesus in the synagogue:

The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, "What is this? A new teaching – and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him" (v27).

This, of course, was the result of Jesus having just cast out an evil spirit, described by Mark in verses 23-26:

Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit cried out, 24. "What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One of God!" 25. "Be quiet!" said Jesus sternly. "Come out of him!" 26. The evil spirit shook the man violently and came out of him with a shriek.
Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit

The same incident is recorded in Luke 4:33ff where again the NIV uses the word possessed to describe the man’s condition. However, literally translated, Mark says:

And there was in their synagogue a man with (or in) an unclean spirit and Luke describes him as a man having a spirit of an unclean demon (Luke 4:33).

I mention this simply to point out that the New Testament uses a variety of different expressions to refer to what today is commonly described as demon possession (another of which is to be demonized (e.g. Matthew 4:24, 8:16, 28, 33; Mark 1:32, 5:15,16, 18; Luke 8:36). It’s clear to me that all these expressions are used interchangeably and that it’s a mistake to try to draw a distinction between them.

What’s particularly interesting is that in the case we’re looking at the man was in the synagogue. But this is no basis for the argument that a born-again Christian can be demon possessed. There is no evidence that the man was a believer (even though the demon in him knew who Jesus was). Literally translated, verses 24-26 read:

Away! What to us and to you, Jesus of Nazareth? You came to destroy us. I know who you are – the holy one of God. And Jesus rebuked it, saying, Be silenced, and come out of him. And the unclean spirit tore him and cried out with a great voice and came out of him.

It’s important to note that it’s the demon, not the man, who is speaking, though the demon is speaking through the man. And it’s the demon that Jesus rebukes and tells to be silent. The demon says, Away! It wants Jesus to keep his distance. Jesus and demons have nothing in common. An unclean spirit cannot bear the presence of the holy one of God.

The NIV translation Have you come to destroy us? can equally well be translated as a statement rather than a question. (There are no punctuation marks in the Greek text, so it could mean You have come to destroy us). The demon knew who Jesus was. It might well have known the purpose for which he has come – to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8).

Notice that Jesus didn’t argue with the demon. He didn’t need to. He had complete authority over it. He didn’t need to take authority. He exercised the authority he already had, because he was a man under authority – the authority of his Father. He rebuked it and commanded it to be silent and come out of the man. And, of course, it did!

Now please note that I am not teaching a methodology for exorcising demons here. But there are at least two clear principles implicit in what I have said:

As Christians we are in Christ (Ephesians 1:13) and Christ lives within us by his Spirit. Demons cannot cohabit with Christ. They flee from his presence. So I believe it’s a mistake to attempt to cast a demon out of a Christian. As Christians we need to resist the devil and sometimes it’s necessary for another Christian to stand alongside us in prayer when we’re under attack. But we don’t need exorcism.
If we’re going to be used in setting others free we need to be living under the authority of Jesus. We cannot take authority. In the Bible, authority is always something that’s given. We only have authority if we’re under authority. We either have it or we don’t. If we have it, we don’t need to take it. We exercise it. And if we don’t have it, no amount of ‘taking’ it will help.

But that leads us to the question, Why did Jesus cast out the demon? The man certainly didn’t ask Jesus to help him. There are several possible answers to this. Consider the following:

Because the man was causing a disturbance in the synagogue.
Because the man was so controlled by the demon that he was incapable of asking for help.
Because it was not yet time for Jesus to fully reveal who he was.
Because he refused to let the devil set the agenda.
Because he hated the devastation the enemy had caused in this man’s life.
Because he had compassion on the man. Compare v 41 where Jesus is moved with compassion for the leper.
Because the reason he had come to earth was to destroy the works of the devil. The Greek word for destroy in 1 John 3:8 is luo, which means to loose or undo. The devil binds people. Jesus unties them. He sets them free.
Because he knew that it was his Father’s will (cf. John 5:19).
Because casting out demons was a sign that the kingdom of God had come.

10.Because the miracle would cause the people of Capernaum to become his disciples?

Now, although most of these suggestions have merit – some more than others – I think the first one is improbable and the last one is definitely inaccurate. Look at verses 27-28:

The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, "What is this? A new teaching – and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him." 28. News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.

The people were amazed, but did they repent and believe? Compare Matthew 11:20-24:

20. Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent…

And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."

This indicates that despite the miracles he performed there, the people of Capernaum did not repent. Possibly because of pride. The simple fact is that where miracles of healing and deliverance are taking place people will come out of curiosity and in the hope that their needs will be met. But though many are healed, relatively few become true disciples of Jesus.

So why does God bother? Because miracles are signs of the kingdom and make it easier for people to believe. God wants everyone to be saved, but the choice to repent and believe is theirs. It’s one thing to be amazed at the miracles, as the inhabitants of Capernaum were, but quite another to believe the message of the kingdom of God and to repent and put your trust in Jesus as your Saviour.

And perhaps this is why we don’t see more miracles in this country today? Even Jesus could do no mighty work in Nazareth because of their unbelief (Mark 6:5-6). Unbelief in a community inhibits the miraculous. And so can lack of faith and prayer on the part of God’s people. But that doesn’t alter the truth that miracles are God’s way of confirming his word (Mark 16:15-20). It’s our responsibility to preach the word and be led by the Spirit as we believe for miraculous confirmation. But we will have more to say about this in future talks.

View Details

Talk 3 Mark 1:14-20 Winning others for Jesus

Welcome to Talk 3 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. So far we have seen how Mark begins by establishing very clearly that Jesus is none other than God himself who came to make possible the forgiveness of our sins. To prepare for his coming the people were to confess their sins, repent and be baptised. But when Jesus came he would do more for them than baptism in water ever could. He would baptise them in the Holy Spirit.

I also pointed out that in New Testament times repentance, faith, water baptism and baptism in the Spirit would usually have all taken place on the same day, and that, though these are each distinct elements with the process of Christian initiation, they would probably have been viewed as all part of the same event.

In our last talk we saw in the baptism of Jesus, his willingness to be identified with sinners even though he was sinless, his determination to do what is right, and his desire always to do the will of God. And we suggested that, if we truly wish to be his disciples, we must not only repent and believe the gospel, but that we should follow his example and be baptised by total immersion.

We saw too that Jesus’ baptism in water also teaches us about the relationship between water baptism and the baptism in the Spirit. The baptism in the Spirit was the gateway to his miracle working ministry. For Jesus, this was received at/after his baptism in water. And this was just what the early disciples expected and, although this is rarely the case today, it is certainly what we should be teaching and believing for.

And finally, we considered five reasons why the Holy Spirit led Jesus into the desert to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most important of these was that we could learn from his example how to deal with temptation. We saw the importance of keeping full of the Spirit, of being led by the Spirit, and of correctly understanding and using the Spirit’s sword, the word of God.

Today we’ll be looking at Mark 1:14-20. The passage introduces us to the message that Jesus preached and how he called his first disciples. It also shows us how, like the first disciples, we can get involved in spreading the good news of the gospel – how we can win other people for Jesus. The key, as we shall see, is found in verse 17 where Jesus says:

"Come, follow me, …and I will make you fishers of men."

If we want to win others for Jesus, we must first follow him ourselves. And we must allow him to make us. And as we work through the passage we’ll see from the example of Jesus and the response of the disciples several other important principles. But first, let’s begin by reading the whole passage.

14. After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of (the kingdom of) God. 15. "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" 16. As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 17. "Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." 18. At once they left their nets and followed him. 19. When he had gone a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John in a boat, preparing their nets. 20. Without delay he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.

After John was put in prison (14)

Mark begins by mentioning briefly that John the Baptist, Jesus’ cousin, had been put in prison. We know from chapter 6 that this was because he had annoyed Herod by telling him that it was not lawful for him to have married his brother’s wife. Undeterred by this news, Jesus begins his public ministry. He preaches essentially the same message as John – Repent and believe the good news. Despite the possible danger in doing this – John was eventually executed by Herod – Jesus is determined to do God’s will. So the first thing we can learn from the example of Jesus is that if we are going to be used in spreading the good news, we must not be deterred by apparent setbacks. We will need to embrace the danger.

Jesus went into Galilee (14)

Before Jesus could proclaim the good news he had to go. Actually, the Greek literally means, he came. I’m reminded that before Jesus could tell us the good news, he had to come. He had to come from the glory of Heaven to a sin-sick world to make our salvation possible. And if others are to be saved, we too need to go. This is what he commanded us – Go into all the world and preach the good news (Mark 16:15). And the world begins right where you are. Jesus went into Galilee. Jesus had been brought up in Nazareth, which is in the region of Galilee. He went to where he had been brought up. If we’re going to be used in spreading the good news about Jesus, we must be willing to go. If need be, to the ends of the earth, but at least to those who are already around us. This implies intentionality. To catch fish, you have to GO fishing.

proclaiming the good news of (the kingdom of) God. (14)

The message must be proclaimed, announced. Of course, it’s no good talking the talk if we’re not walking the walk. Nevertheless, living good lives is not enough. Actually I’m not living a good life if I’m not telling others what they need to hear.

The message is good news about God. More specifically, the kingdom of God. It’s good news that God’s in charge. More of this in a moment.

The time has come (15)

For thirty years Jesus had been relatively silent, but now the time had come. How did he know? He lived life in dependence on his Father and in close fellowship with him. He was now baptised in the Spirit and empowered to begin his ministry. It was through the power of the Spirit that the kingdom would be manifested.

In Matthew 12:28, after healing a demonized man who had been blind and mute Jesus says:

If it is that by the Spirit of God I drive our demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you (v28).

The kingdom of God is near. Or, the kingdom of God has come.

The Greek verb engizo literally mean to come near.

The kingdom is present wherever the king is present. Wherever Jesus was present, there were manifestations of the kingdom like healing and casting out demons. And in Matthew 10:1 he gave his disciples authority to do the same:

He called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.

And in verses 7-8 he went on to say:

As you go, preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.' Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.

They did this with the special authority Jesus gave them at that time. Later, after Jesus had returned to Heaven, to do these things they had to wait until they were baptised in the Spirit. Their authority would come from the Spirit, and the miracles they performed, like those performed by Jesus, would be done through the direction and power of the Spirit. When we’re baptised in the Spirit we should expect him to work miracles through us. It’s not so much a matter of claiming promises as being led by the Holy Spirit.

Repent and believe the good news! (15)

The message we have to share with people is good news, demonstrated by amazing miracles of healing, deliverance, provision and forgiveness. But its blessings are to be received by repenting and believing. When we share the good news with people, we must not dodge the issue of repentance. It’s not good news for those who refuse to repent and believe.

So we’ve looked at the example of Jesus. We’ve seen that if we are going to be used in spreading the good news:

· We must not be deterred by apparent setbacks. We will need to embrace the danger.

· We must be willing to go.

· We must be willing to speak.

· We should expect God to work miracles through us as we are led and empowered by the Holy Spirit.

· We must not dodge the issue of repentance.

But now let’s look at the response of the disciples.

As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 17. "Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." 18. At once they left their nets and followed him. 19. When he had gone a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John in a boat, preparing their nets. 20. Without delay he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.
"Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men."

The purpose of our calling to follow Jesus is to make us fishers of men (17).

At once they left their nets and followed him

At once… they followed him

Taken with verse 20 where we’re told that Jesus called his disciples without delay, we see three things:

· We should not delay in telling others the good news.

· When Jesus calls us to salvation, we should not delay.

· When he calls us to serve him, we should not put off the decision.

There is a clear sense of urgency in all this, and this is emphasised in verses 18 and 20 where the fishermen left their nets (v18) which were their livelihood, and their father (v20). They left their family as well. They left all to follow him. Their attitude can best be summarised in one word – COMMITMENT. As CT Studd, a Cambridge graduate and former England cricketer once said:

If Jesus Christ be God, and died for me, no sacrifice can be too great for me to make for him.

And Studd lived up to his words. After his father’s death, he gave away his entire inheritance and became a missionary, serving the Lord in China, India, and finally in Africa. Now we may not all be called to give up our means of livelihood or our family to follow Jesus, but we should all be willing to do so. We are all called to commitment. So now let’s summarise the principles we have discovered in today’s passage.

· When Jesus calls us to salvation, we should not delay.

· When he calls us to serve him, we should not put off the decision.

· We should follow his example and allow him to make us fishers of men.

· We should not delay in telling others the good news of the kingdom of God.

· We should expect God to work miracles through us as we are led and empowered by the Holy Spirit.

· We must not be deterred by apparent setbacks. We will need to embrace the danger.

· We must be willing to go.

· We must be willing to speak, and we must not dodge the issue of repentance.

Of course, we’re all different, but how can these principles be worked out in YOUR life?

View Details

Talk 2 Mark 1:9-13 The baptism and temptation of Jesus

Welcome to Talk 2 in our new series on Mark’s Gospel. In our first talk we saw how Mark begins by establishing very clearly that Jesus is none other than God himself who came to make possible the forgiveness of our sins. To prepare for his coming the people were to confess their sins, repent and be baptised. But when Jesus came he would do more for them than baptism in water ever could. He would baptise them in the Holy Spirit.

From elsewhere in the New Testament, we saw that it was through the work of the Spirit that we are empowered to live new lives by being born again. We begin to show the fruit of the Spirit which Paul describes in Galatians 5. And when we are baptised in the Spirit we are told in Acts 1 we receive power to be effective witnesses for Christ.

I also pointed out that in New Testament times repentance, faith, water baptism and baptism in the Spirit would usually have all taken place on the same day, and although today we often think of each of them as distinct experiences, the early disciples may well have thought of them all as part of the same event. This probably accounts for those occasions in the New Testament when writers may appear to use expressions like repentance, baptism, or baptise in the Spirit to refer to the whole event of Christian initiation, not just to the distinct aspect that each of these terms represents. If all this seems a bit complicated, don’t worry. I’ll be saying more about this when we look at the baptism of Jesus and its close relationship with his baptism in the Spirit.

So today we’ll be considering:

· The baptism of Jesus

· His baptism in the Spirit

· His temptation in the wilderness

We’ll begin by reading verses 9-13.

9. At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptised by John in the Jordan. 10. As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11. And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." 12. At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert, 13. and he was in the desert forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him.

Jesus’ baptism

Notice, first, how Jesus was baptised. As we said last time, in the Greek language in which the New Testament was originally written, the word baptise means immerse. This is confirmed by how Mark describes Jesus’ baptism. In verse 10 he refers to Jesus coming up out of the water. This implies that he had first gone down into the water. In fact, wherever the New Testament gives us a description of people being baptised, it’s clear that baptism was always by immersion. For example, in Acts 8:38-39 we read how Philip baptised the Ethiopian eunuch:

…Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptised him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.

So Jesus, like everybody else, was baptised by being immersed in water. But why was Jesus baptised? We saw last time that John was preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (v4) and that the people were baptised confessing their sins (v5). But Jesus had no sins to confess. He was God’s beloved Son with whom God was well-pleased (v11). He was the spotless Lamb of God who had come to take away the sins of the world (John 1:29). In fact, Matthew 3:14 tells us that, when Jesus came to John to be baptised, John protested, saying, I need to be baptised by you, and do you come to me?

So why was Jesus baptised? Jesus himself gives us the first part of the answer in Matthew 3:15, where he says. Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfil all righteousness. The purpose of Jesus’ life was to do the will of God, right down to the last detail. This is no more clearly seen than in the Garden of Gethsemane when, the night before he was to be crucified, Jesus prayed earnestly that, if it were possible, he might not suffer the agony of crucifixion, but, in total submission to the will of his Father, ended by saying, Yet not as I will, but as you will (Matthew 26:39). Everything he did was motivated by his desire to do God’s will (Hebrews 10:7). So for Jesus, being baptised was an essential part of doing God’s will. He said it was necessary to fulfil all righteousness.

For Jesus the ultimate fulfilment of all righteousness, of doing God’s will, was to die on the cross to save us from our sins. But how does this relate to his baptism? Perhaps the answer lies in the understanding that his baptism in water was a foreshadowing of the baptism of suffering he was to endure at Calvary (Matthew 20:22-23, Luke 12:50). At Calvary Jesus suffered the death of a common criminal. This made him look like a sinner. But more than that, when he died on the cross he was carrying our sin.

And at his baptism too, to those who were watching, he looked like a sinner. The sinless Lamb of God identified with sinners. Perhaps that’s one reason why the voice from Heaven was heard, saying, You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased. All the others who were being baptised were sinners, but God was making it clear that his Son was different.

Finally, before we leave the subject of Jesus’ baptism, it’s perhaps good to remind ourselves that his baptism is a compelling reason for us to be baptised. In John 12:26 Jesus told us that if we serve him we must follow him. And 1 Peter 2:21 tells us that Jesus has left us an example that we should follow in his steps. For more reasons why we should be baptised, please see You’d Better Believe It, pages 83-85.

His baptism in the Spirit

10. As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove.

I’m referring to this as Jesus’ baptism in the Spirit because of the words descending on him. Jesus himself identified the baptism in the Spirit as the Spirit coming on us (Acts 1:5, 8), and his promise was fulfilled in the experience of the disciples at Pentecost (Acts 1:17), the Samaritan converts (Acts 8:15-17), Cornelius and his household (Acts 10:44-46), the Ephesians (Acts 19:1-6), and countless millions of Christians ever since.

The purpose of this wonderful baptism in the Spirit was, and still is, the equipping of God’s servants with power for service, and even Jesus needed this empowering of the Spirit before beginning his miracle-working ministry. Of course, the miracle of the incarnation – how Jesus could be both fully God and fully man – is a mystery. But while he was here on earth as a man he was totally dependent on his relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit. He was a man under authority (Matthew 8:8-9) and the miracles he did were performed as a result of the anointing of the Spirit (Acts 10:38).

It’s noteworthy, too, that all three Persons of the Trinity are actively present in the passage we’re looking at. Jesus, God the Son, is coming up out of the waters of baptism. The Holy Spirit is descending upon him like a dove. And he hears the voice of God the Father speaking from Heaven. If Jesus needed this empowering of the Spirit, how much more do we?

So Jesus is baptised in water and in the Spirit on the same occasion. But what is the relationship between them? Notice, first, that in all four gospels being baptised in the Holy Spirit is distinguished from being baptised in water. John was baptising in water, but Jesus would baptise with the Holy Spirit.

The nature and purpose of baptism in the Spirit is not made clear here – as we have seen, Jesus himself does that in Acts 1:4-8 – but it is evident that Spirit-baptism is not only distinct from water-baptism but also vastly superior to it and more important than it. Jesus is greater than John, and the Spirit is greater than water! So water-baptism must never be confused with Spirit-baptism.

However, Jesus' baptism does indicate that there is a close relationship between them. The Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at or at least immediately after his baptism in water. And, as I mentioned last time, elsewhere in the New Testament the baptism in the Spirit usually occurred at about the same time as baptism in water. It happened so close to it that we might reasonably say that it happened at baptism. Yet its timing was usually sufficiently distinct from baptism for us truthfully to say that it happened after baptism. That’s why, in my book, The Holy Spirit – an Introduction, I coined the phrase at-after. I suggested that Jesus received the Spirit 'at-after' baptism. Consider the following literal translations:

Jesus, having been baptised, came up immediately from the water; and behold the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God coming down on him like a dove (Matthew 3:16)

And Jesus was baptised in the River Jordan by John. And immediately, coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit coming down like a dove (Mark 1:9-10)

And it came to pass that, while all the people were being baptised, Jesus also having been baptised and continuing to pray, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit descended.... (Luke 3:21-22).

We notice that in Matthew Jesus has already been baptised, but he is hardly out of the water when the Spirit comes upon him. In Mark he is coming up out of the water. In Luke he has been baptised and is continuing to pray when the Spirit descends. From this it is clear that Jesus' baptism in the Spirit occurred immediately after his baptism in water and yet was in a very real sense a definite part of it. So it would be wrong to teach that the Spirit is automatically received at baptism, for reception of the Spirit is distinct from baptism. Yet we must equally strongly resist the temptation to make a wide separation between them, for they are closely associated in the New Testament. We should expect people to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit at or shortly after water-baptism (unless, like Cornelius, they have already received beforehand). For the promise still holds true:

Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).

Jesus’ temptation

We now come to the temptation of Jesus in the desert. Mark records this extremely briefly:

12. At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert, 13. and he was in the desert forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him.

Matthew and Luke are far more detailed. All three synoptic gospels tell us that after his baptism Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert where he was tempted by the devil. But Matthew 4:1 clearly indicates that the temptation was the purpose of Jesus’ being led into the desert. He was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. At first sight this seems a rather surprising statement. The Lord Jesus himself taught us to pray that we should not be led into temptation and James 1:13 makes it clear that no-one is tempted by God. So why did the Spirit lead Jesus to be tempted?

Before attempting to answer this question we need to remember that although God tempts nobody he may nevertheless sometimes allow temptation in order that we might be tested. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 10:13 that God will not allow us to be tempted more than we can bear and that he will always provide a way of escape. In Jesus’ case God knew that he was able to fight off the devil’s temptations successfully. But what was God’s purpose in allowing his temptation? In my book, The Holy Spirit - an Introduction, I suggest five things:

So that Jesus might truly sympathise with us in our temptations

In Hebrews 4:15 we are told that Jesus is a high priest who can sympathise with our weaknesses because he was tempted in every way just as we are - yet was without sin.

So that he might succeed where Adam failed

In several passages Paul contrasts Jesus with Adam and refers to him as the last Adam (e.g. Romans 5:12ff, 1 Corinthians 15:21ff (esp. vv45ff). The temptations Christ resisted in the desert may be compared with the original temptation faced by Adam in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3). Where Adam failed, as we all have at times failed to resist temptation, Jesus triumphed.

So that he might demonstrate his perfection

Hebrews 9:14 tells us that through the eternal Spirit Christ offered himself unblemished to God. Nothing but a perfect sacrifice could atone for sin. In overcoming the temptations to which all other human beings have succumbed Jesus demonstrated that he was a worthy sacrifice for the sins of the whole world.

So that we might learn from his example how to deal with temptation

Because Jesus has overcome temptation, he has shown us how it is possible for us to do so. In this connection notice the importance of:

a) keeping full of the Spirit (Luke 4:1)

b) being led by the Spirit (Luke 4:1). It is noteworthy that Luke says that Jesus was led by the Spirit in (not into) the desert. The suggestion is perhaps that the Spirit assisted Jesus during his temptations.

c) correctly understanding and using the Spirit’s sword, the word of God. The Word of God is called the sword of the Spirit in Ephesians 6:17. Jesus used that sword against the enemy by quoting the Word in connection with each temptation (Matthew 4:4, 7, 10).

Notice, too, that Jesus was tempted to doubt what had happened when the Spirit came upon him after his baptism. God had said, You are my Son (Luke 3:22), but Satan came with the temptation, If you are the Son of God.... (Luke 4:3, 9). As Christians we are sometimes tempted to doubt the genuineness of what happened at our baptism in the Spirit. Like Jesus we must resist with the word of God. A helpful scripture in this connection is Luke 11:11ff. We sometimes need to remind the devil - and ourselves - that God does not give snakes or stones or scorpions to his children.

So that he might prove that he could be trusted not to abuse his miracle-working power

Two of the temptations suggested that Jesus should use his miracle-working power for the wrong reasons, i.e., to satisfy personal desires and to exhibit God’s power as a spectacle to the crowds. The right motivation for the working of miracles is love (1 Corinthians 13). Jesus had received the Spirit in order that his anointed ministry might begin (cf. Luke 3:22, 4:18ff).

Before embarking upon that ministry, it seems that his motivation for working miracles first had to be tested. We mustn’t be surprised if God tests us before entrusting us with more of his supernatural power.

But now it’s time to summarise what we’ve said so far.

In our first talk we saw that the coming of Jesus was good news. He was none other than God himself who came to make possible the forgiveness of our sins. We saw the importance of repentance, confession of sin, and water baptism. This was to prepare people for an even greater baptism, a baptism which came from Jesus himself, the baptism in the Holy Spirit.

We saw that it was through the work of the Spirit that we are empowered to live new lives by being born again. We begin to show the fruit of the Spirit which Paul describes in Galatians 5. And when we are baptised in the Spirit we are told in Acts 1 we receive power to be effective witnesses for Christ.

In this talk we have considered:

· The baptism of Jesus

· His baptism in the Spirit

· His temptation in the wilderness

In the baptism of Jesus, we have seen his willingness to be identified with sinners, even though he was sinless, his determination to do what is right, and his desire always to do the will of God. And, if we have repented and believed the gospel, we learn from his example that, if we truly wish to be his disciples, we too should be baptised by total immersion.

But Jesus’ baptism in water also teaches us about the relationship between water baptism and the baptism in the Spirit. The baptism in the Spirit was the gateway to his miracle working ministry. For Jesus, this was received at/after his baptism in water. And this was just what the early disciples expected and, although this is rarely the case today, it is certainly what we should be teaching and believing for.

Finally, we considered why the Holy Spirit led Jesus into the desert to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most important answer we gave was so that we might learn from his example how to deal with temptation. We saw the importance of keeping full of the Spirit, of being led by the Spirit, and of correctly understanding and using the Spirit’s sword, the word of God.

If Jesus so needed the help and power of the Holy Spirit in fulfilling God’s will for his life, how much more do we?

Next time: Jesus calls his first disciples – what lessons can we learn about winning others for Jesus?

View Details

Galatians Talk 10 Galatians 6:1-18

This is the final talk in our series on Galatians. We have seen that the main theme of the letter has been to show that salvation is by faith and not by works. Faith in Christ’s substitutionary, all sufficient, atoning death is the only way to Heaven. Attempts to get there any other way will fail. The law of the Old Testament could not save us because no one, except Jesus, has ever kept it in its entirety. But Jesus’ death has set us free from the law. We must be careful to stand firm in that freedom and not to get entangled with the legal requirements of the Old Testament.

For Christians Jews – and particularly the Galatians – there was the threat of the Judaizers, those who were teaching that faith in Christ was not enough and that circumcision was necessary for salvation. And although this may not be directly applicable to most Christians today, there is always the temptation to trust in other forms of religious practice – baptism, confirmation, church attendance etc. – when none of these things can save us. With regard to baptism, for example, we should be baptised because we are already saved by faith, and because Jesus has commanded it, but not in the misguided hope that getting baptised will save us.

Salvation cannot be achieved by self-effort. It can only be received because of God’s grace by trusting Christ to save us. And when we receive that salvation we are enabled by God’s indwelling Spirit to fulfil the only law that really matters, the law of love, which, as we saw last time, finds wonderful expression in the fruit of the Spirit in our lives. But that now brings us to the final chapter in the letter, which Paul begins by giving examples of how the fruit of the Spirit will be in evidence among us.

Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. 2 Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ. 3 If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4 Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, 5 for each one should carry his own load.

These verses had a specific application to the Galatians, and scholars have speculated on what that might have been, but it’s clear that the principles Paul is teaching may be applied to all Christians, and that’s how we’ll be considering them today.

1 Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

Who can fail to be moved by the sacrificial love shown by Christians like Mother Teresa? But although such compassion for the poor is at the heart of the Christian message (cf. Galatians 2:10), what’s even more important is, in the words of James 5:20, to turn a sinner from the error of his way and so save them from death and cover a multitude of sins. The greatest love we can show anyone, whether a Christian or not, is to warn them of the consequences of sin.

So Paul says that if we are truly spiritual (manifesting the fruit of the Spirit), and we become aware that a fellow Christian has been overtaken in misconduct or sin of any sort (Amplified Bible) we are to seek to restore them gently (without any sense of superiority and with all gentleness). We need to remember that we too may be tempted.

2 Carry each other's burdens…

Carrying each other’s burdens could well mean helping our fellow Christians with any difficulties they may be facing, but bearing in mind what he has said in verse 1, Paul may mean that we are to be patient with their failings.

2 …and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.

By carrying each other’s burdens we show our love for one another. And as we saw in chapter 5, love is the fulfilment of the law. The law of Moses contained numerous rules and regulations, but the law of Christ is love. If I love my neighbour I won’t steal from him, if I love my wife I won’t commit adultery. If we truly love, we don’t need the law, not even the Ten Commandments! We will keep them because we love God and we love our neighbour.

3 If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself.

Still keeping verse 1 in mind, we are to beware of pride, especially when we are aware of the failings of others. We should watch out in case we are tempted in the same way. We are not to think of ourselves more highly than we ought to think. This involves humility.

4 Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without

comparing himself to somebody else, 5 for each one should carry his own load.

We are not accountable for the actions of others, but we are accountable for our own. Beware of the danger of comparing yourself with others. We should not think of ourselves as superior to them, even if they have sinned. And we should not think of ourselves as inferior either. We are to have a sober estimation of ourselves. We are what we are by the grace of God and we carry a responsibility to use what we are, and the gifts he has given us, for his glory and not our own. That brings us to verses 6-10 where Paul draws attention to the benefits that we reap if we sow to please the Spirit. Note the references to sowing and reaping as we read these verses.

6 Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor. 7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9 Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. 10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

The underlying principle is these verses is found in verse 7.

7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.

A man reaps what he sows.

This is universally true, and here Paul applies it in a variety of contexts.

6 Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.

This demonstrates the responsibility of those who are taught to support financially those who teach them. Paul develops this more fully in 1 Corinthians 9:1-14. The principle that we reap what we sow financially is also very clearly taught in 2 Corinthians 8-9 (esp. 9:6-11).

8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature (flesh), from that nature (the flesh) will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

We pointed out in talk 8 that the translation sinful nature is not helpful. The word in Greek means flesh. Paul expands on this in Romans 8:1-9 where he concludes by saying that you are not in (the realm of) the flesh but in (the realm of) the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Before we became Christians we were all in the realm of the flesh because we were spiritually dead, but when we were born again we became spiritually alive.

9 Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. 10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

In our last talk, when we were talking about goodness as a fruit of the Spirit, we referred to Colossians 1:10 where Paul says:

And we pray this in order that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and may please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God.

Now in Galatians 6 we are told that doing good works will reap its own reward. Note the following:

· We should take every opportunity to do good to all people, especially to our fellow Christians.

· This may cause us to become weary and there’s a danger of giving up.

· But we reap what we sow, and if we persevere, we will be rewarded.

· This will take place at the proper time. (This may be in this life or the next).

Now to the final eight verses:

11 See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand! 12 Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 Not even those who are circumcised obey the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh. 14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation. 16 Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even to the Israel of God. 17 Finally, let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus. 18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen.

11 See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand!

Paul usually dictated his letters, so it’s unlikely that he physically wrote the whole of Galatians. However, to prove its authenticity, these last few verses were written by his own hand, just as we might sign a letter that had been typed. What he writes here is very much a summary of what he has been saying throughout the letter. Have nothing to do with the teachings of the Judaizers.

12 Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 Not even those who are circumcised obey the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh.

The Judaizers’ motives are entirely wrong. They want you to be circumcised because they want to make a good impression as far as their fellow Jews are concerned and to avoid being persecuted by them. They may keep the law about circumcision, but they don’t obey the whole law. Yet they want you to obey this particular part of it so that they can boast about you flesh.

14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

Paul, however, would boast about nothing except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. He was not ashamed of the gospel of Christ because it’s the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes** (Romans 1:16). Nothing else matters. As far as the world is concerned, Paul considers both himself and the law as dead. Compare Galatians 2:20. (Remember the teaching I gave in earlier talks in this series on our identification with Christ).

15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation.

Paul couldn’t be clearer. It doesn’t matter whether you’ve been circumcised or not. What matters is being born again.

16 Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even to the Israel of God.

Peace and mercy only come to those who follow the teaching of justification by faith. They are the true Israel, the Israel of God. It’s perfectly clear from all that Paul has said so far that God’s Israel, those whom God considers to be Israel, is comprised of all those, and only those, who, whether Jew or Gentile, have put their trust in Christ for salvation.

17 Finally, let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus. 18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen.

Paul has said enough. He does not want to be troubled again by this matter. His body bears the marks of his suffering for Christ. That’s enough trouble, without the addition of all the pain the Galatians were causing him by their forsaking the gospel he had preached to them (Cf. 1:6). But despite that, he prays for those who are truly his brothers that they will experience anew the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ by which they had been saved.

So what is the overall message of Galatians?

We are saved by believing and continuing to believe that Jesus’ death on the cross is all that is necessary for salvation. Trusting in anything else in addition calls into question the genuineness of our faith in Christ.

Are you trusting in Christ alone for salvation? There is no other way to be saved.

We have now concluded our series on Galatians. God willing, we will start a new series in September. So there will be no new podcasts during July and August, but, if you’d like to keep listening, there are over 200 to choose from, details of which can be found on my website: https://www.davidpetts.org/podcast

View Details

Galatians Talk 9 Galatians 5:22-23 The Fruit of the Spirit

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS TALK IS TAKEN FROM MY BOOK

THE VOICE OF GOD – How he speaks to us today

In our last talk, as we were looking at Galatians 5:13-26, where Paul is contrasting the acts of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit, we saw that we need to:

Remember that even after we become Christians there’s still a tendency to sin in our flesh.
Recognise that we cannot overcome this by obeying man-made rules and regulations.
Reckon ourselves to be dead. Dead to the law, dead to sin. Dead to the acts of the flesh. We’re identified with Christ. We should live like Christ.
Rely on the help of the Holy Spirit.

Today we’ll be considering the fruit of the Spirit in more detail. Paul lists them in Galatians 5:22-23. These are qualities that should be evident in the life of every Christian as they reflect the character of Jesus which the indwelling Spirit of Christ seeks to reproduce in us. They are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. (You’ll find similar lists in Colossians 3:12-15 and 1 Corinthians 13:4-8).

As we read the Gospels it is not difficult to see these qualities in the life of the Lord Jesus. And, as we see what Jesus did, God speaks to us challenging us to do the same. Our attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus (Philippians 2:5). And, of course, our attitude will determine our actions. Let’s look at this wonderful ‘fruit’ in more detail asking God to speak to us through the attitude and actions of Jesus. We’ll take them in reverse order from the list in Galatians so that we will conclude with love which is undeniably the greatest of all the fruit of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 13:13).

Self-control Right at the start of his ministry, straight after he was baptised in the River Jordan, Jesus was led into the desert by the Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Then, Matthew tells us:

After fasting for forty days and forty nights, he was hungry (Matthew 4:2).

He was hungry. What an understatement! He had eaten nothing for six weeks! I feel hungry if I haven’t eaten for six hours! Then, suddenly, an opportunity comes to break his fast. Some of the stones in the desert may have looked like loaves of bread. You’re the Son of God, aren’t you? says Satan, Why not turn these stones into bread? Now Jesus knew that he was the Son of God. God has said so (just three verses earlier) at his baptism:

This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased (Matthew 3:17).

Jesus knew that he had the power to do what Satan suggested, but just because you can doesn’t mean that you should. I can’t imagine how strong the temptation to eat must have been, but Jesus chose to listen to his Father rather than to Satan. He answered:

It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God’ (Matthew 4:4).

What amazing self-control! Where did it come from? His relationship with God, his desire to please him and his knowledge of God’s word. Could there be any greater demonstration of self-control? Yes, and we find it in Matthew’s account of the crucifixion:

Those who passed by hurled insults at him… saying… ‘Save yourself. Come down from the cross if you are the Son of God!’ (Matthew 27:39-40).

And Jesus was the Son of God, and he could have come down from the cross. But he didn’t. Despite the agony, he stayed there. Why? Because he knew that if we were to be saved he must die for our sins. He must pay the price. He must take the punishment. So he stayed there. He stayed there because he loved us.

Humility The Greek word translated as gentleness in Galatians 5:23 carries with it the thought of humility. Paul uses it a few verses later when he says:

Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted (Galatians 6:1).

This warning, to watch yourself because you might be tempted too, clearly implies that Paul is using the word gently to mean in a spirit of humility. This is confirmed by the paraphrase in the Amplified Bible which interprets gently as not with a sense of superiority or self-righteousness. So it seems reasonable to assume that this is how he is using it when talking about the fruit of the Spirit just a few verses earlier.

The humility of Jesus is most clearly expressed in two main New Testament passages. The first is Philippians 2:5-11.

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross!

This passage speaks for itself. It took humility for someone who was equal with God to become a man, to become a servant, to become nothing. And yet he humbled himself even further. He became obedient to death, even death on a cross. And as Christians we’re encouraged to have the same attitude.

And so he did something that would be an active demonstration of the truth later to be expressed by Paul in Philippians 2. It would demonstrate his humility and give his disciples an object lesson in how they too should behave. He got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist (v.4). Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel (v.5).

This was a symbol of what he would accomplish on the cross enabling his disciples to be washed clean by the shedding of his blood. That’s why it was important that Peter, who had protested, should allow Jesus to wash his feet too (vv.6-10). And Jesus’ humility, his willingness to wash feet, to cleanse us from sin, was another expression of his love.

Finally, when Jesus had finished washing their feet he put on his clothes and returned to his place (v.12). What a wonderful symbol of Jesus returning to his place in heaven after he had finished his redemptive work on the cross! (Compare Hebrews 1:3 …After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven).

Then he said:

Do you understand what I have done for you? You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them (vv.12-17).

Faithfulness From the very beginning of his life here on earth Jesus came to do the will of God. Hebrews 10:5-7 tells us that when Christ came into the world, he said…I have come to do your will, O God. Even at the age of 12 Jesus knew that God, not Joseph, was his true Father (Luke 2:49). And throughout his life he was faithful to his Father’s will. In John 4:34, when the disciples were trying to persuade Jesus to eat something, he said:

My food…is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.

And in John 6:38 he says

I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.

But his faithfulness to God and determination to do his will are no more clearly seen than in the Garden of Gethsamane on the night before Jesus was crucified. In Matthew 26 we’re told that he took with him Peter, James and John, and told them, My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow… Stay here and keep watch with me (v.38). Jesus then went a little farther and fell with his face to the ground and prayed:

My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will (v.39).

He then returns to his disciples and finds them sleeping! And this happens twice more. Jesus prays the same prayer, comes back, and finds them sleeping.

This sad story reveals in stark contrast the unfaithfulness of the disciples and faithfulness of Jesus. The disciples can’t even stay awake even at the time of Jesus’ greatest need. Jesus knows what’s going to happen. The thought of crucifixion horrifies him, and he asks his Father three times if there is any other way. But ultimately, when he knows that there is not, his faithfulness shines through.

Yet not as I will, but as you will.

But this story not only reveals Jesus’ faithfulness to God. It shows his faithfulness to his disciples. If Jesus had refused the way of the cross – and he could have – what hope would there have been for them or for us? Perhaps the sight of the disciples sleeping reminded him of the weakness of human nature and our need for him to save us. His faithfulness, motivated by love for his Father and his love for us, gave him the strength to carry on.

Goodness and kindness The English word goodness, like the word good, can be used in many different ways. It’s very flexible. For example, we can talk of a good meal and we can refer to someone as a good person, but the meaning of good in each case is rather different. The same is true of the Greek words for good and goodness (agathos and agathōsunē). So we can’t be entirely sure of how Paul is using the word in Galatians 5:22. However, in the New Testament the word is frequently connected with doing good works and in Colossians 1:10 we read:

And we pray this in order that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and may please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God,

The reference to bearing fruit in this verse seems to suggest that the fruit of the Spirit which Paul calls goodness relates to:

· Living a life worthy of the Lord

· Pleasing him in every way

· Doing good works

· Growing in the knowledge of God.

And, of course, that’s exactly what Jesus did. He lived a sinless life. He pleased God in every way. As a human being he grew in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man (Luke 2:52). And Peter, when summarising Jesus’ ministry, said of him that he went about doing good and healing… (Acts 10:38). He not only was good. He did good. He was anointed with the Holy Spirit to

preach good news to the poor… to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour (Luke 4:18-19).

Similarly his kindness overflowed again and again as he met the needs of the poor and needy. Consider, for example, his kindness in turning water into wine at the wedding-feast at Cana in Galilee. We are so often preoccupied with the amazing miracle that we neglect the kindness of Jesus in performing it. And his goodness and kindness were surely motivated by his love.

Patience The English word patience comes from the Latin verb patior meaning I suffer. That’s why people in hospital are called patients – people who are suffering. But the Greek word makrothumia, translated as patience in Galatians 5:22, has a wider meaning. It comes from two other Greek words, makros meaning far and thumos meaning wrath or anger. So to exercise makrothumia is to keep your anger far from you. It’s used elsewhere in the New Testament to mean patient enduring of evil, slowness of avenging injuries, or patient expectation.

It’s not difficult to see all these qualities in the life of the Lord Jesus. He was consistently enduring opposition from sinners (Hebrews 12:3), he prayed for the forgiveness of those who crucified him (Luke 23:34) and he endured the cross, scorning its shame because he patiently expected the joy that was set before him (Hebrews 12:2).

But he was patient with his disciples too. They were so slow to learn and to believe. On the eve of his crucifixion they still had not fully understood who he was. In John 14:2-9 Jesus tells them that he is going to prepare a place for them in his Father’s house (v.2) and that they know the way (v.4). Thomas says to him:

Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?

Jesus answers:

I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him (vv.6-7)

Then Philip says:

Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.

Imagine how Jesus must have felt. In a few hours he’s going to be crucified. And still they don’t understand who he is. I know personally the frustration of a teacher whose students still haven’t got what I’ve painstakingly tried to teach them! Yet I hear infinite patience in Jesus’ reply:

Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? (v.9).

Peace and Joy Peace of heart, as every Christian knows, springs from that peace with God which results from our being in right relationship with him. Being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 5:1). But Jesus had no need to be justified. He was the sinless one. He always lived in right relationship with Father! Yet there’s one occasion when it appears that Jesus is not at peace. As he bears our sins in his body on the cross he cries in anguish: My God, my God. Why have you forsaken me? (Matt 27:46).

It’s as if God has turned his back on his Son. Jesus has forfeited his peace. He’s bearing your sin and mine. And God is too holy to look at sin (Habakkuk 1:13). Jesus sacrifices his peace that we might have peace with God. And he does it because he loves us.

And Jesus’ relationship with God was the source of his joy too. He lived life in God’s presence, and in his presence there is fulness of joy (Psalm 16:11). Luke records that Jesus was full of joy through the Holy Spirit (Luke 10:21). What a pity that so many stained-glass windows and paintings portray him with a long and gloomy face! Jesus was a man of joy! Admittedly, he was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief (Isaiah 53:3).

But that was primarily at the time of his passion, both in the Garden of Gethsemane and the events that led to his crucifixion. As with his peace, so with his joy. He sacrificed both so that we could have them.

Love Finally, Jesus was a man of love. Love is the greatest of the fruit and it is possible to understand Paul’s teaching in Galatians as meaning that love is the fruit and that the eight other qualities are manifestations of it. That’s what I’ve been trying to demonstrate as we’ve looked at each of the fruit of the Spirit. They are all, in one way or another, a manifestation of love (Compare, for example, Colossians 3:12-14).

Jesus’ love is evident throughout the New Testament, not just in the Gospels. Paul could refer to him as the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me (Galatians 2:20) and this reference to the cross reminds us that Calvary is the greatest demonstration of love the world has ever seen. And, what’s more, Paul says he did it for me.

But can we expect to manifest fruit like this in our own lives? Yes we can. Through the help of the Holy Spirit. This is where I find 2 Corinthians 3:18 very helpful. Paul tells us that as we contemplate the Lord's glory, we are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, and this comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! …Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is** (1 John3:1-2).

The more we see Jesus, the more we become like him.

View Details

Galatians Talk 8 Galatians 5:13-26

As we have seen again and again in our studies in Galatians, Paul wrote this letter to demonstrate that salvation is by faith and not by works. Last time, as we looked at 5:1-13, we saw how Paul encouraged the Galatians to stand firm in their faith in Christ and not to get entangled again with the burden of the law from which Christ had set them free.

In verse 1 he had said:

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

He goes on to say that circumcision means nothing. All that counts is faith expressing itself through love. Now, in the second part of the chapter, he picks up this theme by saying in verse 13:

You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature (the flesh); rather, serve one another in love.

Having emphasised that we’re called to freedom, Paul now makes a very important clarification. He doesn’t want to be misunderstood. Freedom does not mean freedom to indulge the flesh. (The NIV translation is unhelpful here. The word is sarx which means flesh. I’ll be saying more about this in a moment). We’re not free to indulge the flesh. We’re free to love, and love is the fulfilment of the law (14). The important thing is to be led by the Spirit. This results in two things. If we live by the Spirit:

we are not under the law (18) – which he has discussed at length already
we will not gratify the desires of the flesh (16).

But what does he mean by the flesh? It’s probably best understood to be the tendency to sin that we have all inherited from Adam. But to clarify this we need to consider two other NT passages, Hebrews 12:9 and Romans 7:8-11.

In Hebrews 12:9 the writer distinguishes between:

our human fathers who are the fathers of our flesh

and

God, our heavenly Father who is the Father of our spirits.

So, we do not receive our spirit from our parents. That is given to us by God. And surely God would not give us anything sinful? But our flesh, which we receive from our parents, has an inbuilt tendency to sin which is ultimately inherited from Adam.

With this in mind, we now turn to Romans 7:8-11 where Paul says that before the law came, sin was dead. He applies this to himself personally. Once he had been alive, but when the commandment came, sin came to life, and he died. Sin took the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived him, and put him to death.

Now if we apply this to ourselves, we were all born with a tendency to sin. This tendency was not in our spirit which God gave us, but in our flesh, inherited from Adam. We were spiritually alive until the time came when we understood, through God’s commandments, the difference between right and wrong, and, because of the tendency to sin in our flesh, we have chosen to do wrong. At that moment we died spiritually, and we needed to be born again. When we were born again, we became alive spiritually, but there remains in our flesh that tendency to sin, to which Paul tells us in Romans 6:11 we must consider ourselves as dead, but alive to God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Now, back to Galatians 5:13

You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature (the flesh); rather, serve one another in love.

We’re not to use our freedom in Christ as an excuse for giving in to the temptations that come to us because of the tendency to sin that is natural to our flesh. We can overcome them because, through the Holy Spirit’s work in regenerating us, we are spiritually alive. In verses 16-17 he says that if we live by the Spirit we will not gratify the desires of the flesh. The desires of the Spirit and the desires of our flesh are diametrically opposed to each other. And without the help of the Spirit we cannot do the good things we would like to do (cf. Romans 7:18-8:2). But if we are led by the Spirit and follow the things we know he desires, we will fulfil the requirements of the law (to love God…) (18, cf. Romans 8:4 where he says very much the same thing).

With all this in mind we now turn to verses 19-26, where Paul contrasts the acts of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit.

The acts of the flesh

19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Paul says that the acts of the flesh are obvious. He nevertheless feels the need to cite some examples! This is clearly not an exhaustive list as he adds at the end, and the like. He assumes that his readers will be well aware that these things are wrong, as he has already warned them about them. This was presumably when he planted the churches in Galatia, as there is no specific mention of them earlier in the letter. But what does he mean in verse 21 when he says that

…those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God?

Those who live like this, literally translated, is those doing these things. However, the verb doing is a present participle, which in Greek implies continuous action. This is presumably why NIV translates it as those who live like this.

Paul is not saying that anyone who ever does any of these things will never go to Heaven! He is reminding them that when he first preached the gospel to them he had warned them about the eternal consequences of sin, and now they are Christians they need to be aware of the dangers of reverting to their old lifestyle. Both the present and future blessings of the kingdom of God are forfeited unless they repent,

The fruit of the Spirit

In stark contrast to the acts of the flesh is the fruit of the Spirit.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

The law of the Old Testament was against the things listed as the acts of the flesh, and so is the law of love that is the fulfilment of the law. If you really love God and other people, you won’t do the things listed as acts of the flesh, and you will do things that manifest the fruit of the Spirit. There is no law against love!

The fruit of the Spirit is such an important subject that we’ll devote an entire talk to it next time. So now let’s move directly to verse 25 where Paul reminds us that we live by the Spirit. We have eternal life through the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit.

And just as we are saved by faith and continue to live by faith, so too at conversion we are sanctified by the work of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:11) and by the same Spirit we are enabled to live holy lives. Compare Colossians 2:6 – just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him.

So Paul says, Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. We who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (24). This takes us back to Galatians 2:20-21 where Paul says:

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

In talk 4, I explained this in some detail and in case you missed it, I encourage you to go back there and read my notes on the subject of our identification with Christ, which I concluded by saying:

Because Jesus loved us and gave himself for us, and because we have put our faith in him, we are identified with him. We are in Christ and Christ lives in us. By accepting him as our Saviour we accepted his death as our death (and that’s why our sins are all forgiven). So, if his death was our death, we’re dead! We no longer live, but Christ lives in us.

So how in practice do we keep in step with the Spirit?

We need to:

Remember that even after we become Christians there’s still a tendency to sin in our flesh.
Recognise that we cannot overcome this by obeying man-made rules and regulations (cf. Colossians 2:20-29 where Paul says that they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence).
Reckon ourselves to be dead. Dead to the law, dead to sin. Dead to the acts of the flesh. We’re identified with Christ. We should live like Christ.
Rely on the help of the Holy Spirit.

We’ll be talking about this next time as we consider the fruit of the Spirit which are a wonderful summary of the character of Jesus. These are the kind of things that will be evident in our lives if we seek to be led by the Spirit rather than trying to please God by our own good works.

View Details

Galatians Talk 7 Galatians 5:1-13

Let’s begin with a reminder of why Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians. It was through Paul’s ministry that they had become Christians, and they had believed his message that salvation was by faith in Christ and not by trying to obey the law of the Old Testament. However, since his departure, others had taught them that faith in Christ was not enough, and that circumcision was necessary for salvation.

So Paul writes to them to correct this error, and so far he has said:

· The message he preached he had received from God and not from man

· The Galatians had accepted it.

· The apostles in Jerusalem had endorsed it.

· The Galatians knew from their experience of receiving the Spirit that the way God worked in their lives was in response to faith and not to obedience to the law.

· The law itself teaches that justification is by faith and not by works.

· The law had had a purpose – it was to demonstrate our need of Christ.

· Once Christ had come, there was no further need for the law.

And as we saw last time, at the end of chapter 4 Paul uses Abraham’s two sons to illustrate the difference between the old covenant God made with Israel at Sinai (the law) and the new covenant made with all who are justified by faith in Christ. Ishmael’s mother, Hagar, was a slave. Isaac’s mother Sarah was free. So, by analogy, Paul argues that, as the spiritual descendants of Abraham, because like Abraham we are justified by faith, we are free from the bondage of the law.

And the theme of freedom continues at the beginning of chapter 5 where he says:

1 It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

Paul reminds them of the state they were in before they became Christians. The law was their slave master. In it there was no hope of salvation because they were unable to keep it. But when they put their trust in Christ, they were set free from the bondage of the law. They were justified by faith, not by works. Christ had set them free, and Paul pleads with them not to go back to trying to be right with God by putting themselves under the requirements of Old Testament law again. He now addresses the serious implications of letting yourself be circumcised:

2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.

First, note the certainty of Paul’s words. Mark my words! (Read my lips!)

Secondly, notice their seriousness – Christ will be of no value to you at all.

The next verse gives us Paul’s reason for saying this:

3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.

To be circumcised implies that you’re looking to the law to save you, but, as Paul has already pointed out (3:10), the law requires obedience to it in its entirety. It’s all or nothing. If you’re looking to the law to save you, you’ve got t obey all of it! Salvation through the law, if that were possible, would require TOTAL OBEDIENCE to it. Salvation through faith in Christ requires TOTAL TRUST in him. So Christ is of no value to you at all, because your trust is not total. So in verse 4 he says:

4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

Why does Paul say this? Because circumcision shows that you believe that Christ’s death was not enough. You are no longer trusting in his grace, but in your works to save you. And salvation is by faith from first to last (Romans 1:17). We must continue to trust him for our salvation.

Paul’s warning in these verses is so strong that it’s hard to believe that it is purely hypothetical. To seek to be justified by our good works means that:

Christ is of no value to you at all (2)

You are alienated from Christ (4)

You have fallen from grace (4).

Now as we turn to verse 5, please note that the first phrase should read For by faith… not But by faith… (as in NIV).

5 FOR by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope.

The reason that you’ve fallen from grace is that by being circumcised you’re trying to be saved by obedience to the law, but it’s by faith that we are saved. Our only hope of the righteousness that’s necessary for salvation is through the work of the Spirit. This happens in response to faith and not to works.

But why does Paul say that we’re waiting for righteousness? Haven’t we already received it? Yes, when we trust Christ to save us we are justified (counted as righteous). Our faith is accounted to us as righteousness. But salvation has implications for the future as well as the present.

· When we first trusted Christ we were saved.

· As we continue to trust him we are being saved.

· And when our time on earth comes to an end we will be saved.

The righteousness we already have though faith in Christ will find its ultimate fulfilment when we finally stand before God clothed in the righteousness which by his grace we have received by faith.

6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

Once we became Christians it no longer mattered whether we had been circumcised or not. It’s irrelevant to our salvation. Faith is all that matters, and this is expressed through love.

Love is the fulfilment of the law. As Paul says in verse 14:

The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbour as yourself."

(Compare Romans 13 where he expands on this).

So we’re not saved by obedience to the law, but by faith. Nevertheless, genuine faith will result in good works, works of love which fulfil the essence of the law.

7 You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8 That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you.

Paul often compares the Christian life to a walk or a race. The Galatians had made a good start and at first were running well but had been put off course by the Judaizers whose teaching did not come from the Lord. The one who calls you could refer to Paul himself (cf. 1:6), but since Paul had received his teaching directly from the Lord, it amounts to the same thing. The teaching of the Judaizers was out of harmony with Paul’s preaching and with the gospel the Lord himself had given him to preach. (Compare 1 Corinthians 14:37).

9 “A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough."

10 I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be.

The danger with false doctrine is that it can spread very quickly. Paul warns them of the danger, which in the light of verses 2-4 was very real, but it’s not too late for the Galatians (who he still refers to as brothers - vv11, 13) to return to the truth, and Paul is confident in the Lord that they will do so.

However, the person who is causing the problem will pay the penalty for doing so. Paul does not specify what that penalty might be, but there are serious consequences for those who pervert the truth. There are eternal consequences for those who persist in their error.

11 Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished.

To understand this verse, we need a bit of imagination. Why does Paul say, If I am still preaching circumcision? Presumably because some of the Jews were saying that he was doing so. But why would they say that? Perhaps some of the Judaizers were telling the other Christians that Paul was preaching circumcision in order to back up their own argument.

Of course, Paul was not. So why does he say, if I am still preaching circumcision? This implies that at some time he had preached it. But when? There is no evidence that it had ever been part of his gospel. In his earliest recorded sermon (Acts 13) he clearly proclaimed the forgiveness of sins through Christ and that through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain through the law of Moses (vv 38-39).

In my view, the clearest and most likely explanation is that he is referring to his pre-conversion days when he would have fervently proclaimed the need for circumcision.

The fact that now, as a Christian, he was teaching that circumcision was no longer necessary, was probably one of the main causes of his being persecuted by the Jews. So, if it were true that he was preaching circumcision, it was natural for him to ask, Why am I still being persecuted? Compare Galatians 6:12-14 where he says:

Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 Not even those who are circumcised obey the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh. 14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

To the Jews the message of the cross was an offense or stumbling-block (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:23) because, among other things, it made circumcision unnecessary. And it remains a stumbling-block to all those who are trying to be justified by their own self effort.

12 As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves (cut themselves off)!

In verse 10 Paul talked about one person who was throwing them into confusion. Now, as previously in 4:17, he refers to them in the plural. Perhaps the individual he refers to was the ringleader. Paul wishes that they would cut themselves off. This is literally what the Greek says and in my view is best left ambiguously. Paul’s intention may well have been what the NIV translation suggests, but it could it simply mean that he wished they would cut themselves off from the fellowship of believers so that their evil yeast might not spread throughout the whole church? He could well have meant both.

So, to summarise, in today’s passage Paul has encouraged the Galatians to stand firm in their faith in Christ and not to get entangled again with the burden of the law. If you’re trying to be justified by obeying the law, you are alienated from Christ. Christ is of no benefit to you. You have fallen from grace. So avoid the teachings of the Judaizers who will pay the penalty for teaching a false way of salvation. In Christ circumcision means nothing. All that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

And that leads us to the second part of the chapter, the theme of which is summarised in verse 13:

You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature (the flesh); rather, serve one another in love.

He then goes on to contrast the works of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit, the first of which is love. But that’s something for next time.

View Details

Galatians Talk 6 Galatians 4:1-31

At the beginning of this chapter Paul picks up on what he has been saying in Chapter 3:23-25 about the temporary nature of the law. He uses a mixture of metaphors to illustrate this.

In 3:23 he sees the law as a jailer keeping us in prison:

23 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law (literally, we were being kept under the law), locked up until faith should be revealed.

In 3:24-25 he sees the law as a pedagogue – an entrusted slave who would lead a young child to school. Its purpose was to lead us to faith in Christ:

24 So the law was (our pedagogue) put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the (pedagogue) supervision of the law.

In 4:1-3 he sees the law as a guardian and trustee appointed by a father until the time came for a child to receive its inheritance:

What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate. 2 He is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father. 3 So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world.

The point of each of these metaphors is to show that since the coming of Christ the law is no longer needed:

4 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5 to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. 6 Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." 7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.

Note:

God sent his Son at just the right time

He was born under the law so that we could be set free from the law

We are redeemed – bought from slavery under the law

We have the full rights of sons

God has given us his Spirit – if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the law

(cf. 5:18)

We are heirs – heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17).

In the light of all this, in 4:8-11 Paul says, Why are you turning back?

8 Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. 9 But now that you know God – or rather are known by God – how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? 10 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11 I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.**

Verses 12-20 reflect Paul’s feeling that in deserting his gospel the Galatians were deserting him (cf. 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting…).

The meaning of verse 12 is unclear, but is probably best understood as follows:

Brethren, I beg of you, become as I am [free from the bondage of Jewish ritualism and ordinances], for I also have become as you are [a Gentile]. You did me no wrong [in the days when I first came to you; do not do it now (Amplified Bible).

He reminds them of how well they had received him when he had first come to preach the gospel to them:

13 As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. 14 Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. 15 What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. 16 Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

The main point of these verses is Paul’s disappointment at the change in the Galatians’ attitude towards him. They are rejecting him in favour of those who preach a false gospel. But he warns them that these Judaizers are wrongly motivated:

17 Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you [from us], so that you may be zealous for them.

Paul’s motives, however, are pure:

18 It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. 19. My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, 20 how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!

· He is always zealous for them (18)

· He is agonizing over them (19)

· He longs to be with them (20).

Note incidentally, that verses 13-14 also shed light on the subject of healing:

· Even great Christians (cf. also Epaphroditus, Timothy, Trophimus) get sick

· They are not always immediately healed

· God has a purpose in allowing sickness.

In the final part of the chapter (vv. 21-31) Paul uses what is technically known as a rabbinic argument. This is a way of interpreting scripture that he would have learned when he studied under rabbi Gamaliel. His reason for using it here is probably because his Judaizer opponents may well have been familiar with this form of argument and, although it is not something we easily follow today, it would undoubtedly have been understood by them.

But before we look at the argument itself, it will be helpful to remind ourselves of the truth that Paul was seeking to demonstrate by it. We have already seen that Paul’s overall purpose in Galatians was to establish that:

· no one is saved by obeying the works of the law but by believing the promise of God

· salvation is by faith alone, not by faith followed by circumcision.

· the true descendants of Abraham are those who believe as Abraham believed

· the true Israel is made up of all who believe, whether Jew or Gentile

· the law enslaves and imprisons people because of their failure to keep it.

Paul now uses an illustration from Genesis to demonstrate these principles. He uses Abraham’s two sons to illustrate the difference between the old covenant God made with Israel at Sinai (the law) and the new covenant made with all who are justified by faith in Christ. He points out that:

…Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.

Abraham had two sons:

Ishmael, whose mother Hagar, was a slave

Isaac, whose mother Sarah, was free.

(So, by analogy, the spiritual descendants of Abraham are free from the bondage of the law).

His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

Ishmael was born naturally

Isaac was born supernaturally as a result of God’s promise

(So Isaac represents us Christians because we are supernaturally born again).

24 These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children.

Hagar and Sarah represent two covenants. God gave the law to Moses on Mount Sinai. Paul uses Hagar to stand for Mount Sinai because both she, and the law given at Sinai, produced slavery in their children. And, Paul says, the present city of Jerusalem is also in slavery with her children. So he seems to be saying:

· Hagar was in bondage (as Sarah’s maidservant)

· The law puts us in bondage (for reasons he has already given)

· The (then) present city of Jerusalem was still in bondage (because it had rejected the way of salvation through faith provided by Christ).

BUT

26. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27. For it is written: "Be glad, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud, you who have no labour pains; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband."

By contrast with the earthly Jerusalem, however, is the heavenly Jerusalem (the Messianic kingdom of Christ). She is our mother, and her children are free. What’s more, the (spiritual) children descended from Sarah, the barren woman, far outnumber those who are naturally born.

28. Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30 But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." (Genesis 21:10)

We Christians are children of promise. We are not naturally born, like Ishmael, but supernaturally born, like Isaac. We are born by the power of the Spirit. Verses 29-30 are a reference back to Genesis 21:9-10. Paul sees Ishmael’s mocking Isaac as symbolising the way the Judaizers were persecuting those who believed his message. But the two cannot coexist. There is only one way of salvation. We must be careful not to compromise.

31 Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

So we are not like Ishmael, born into slavery. We are free from the law, and as Paul will say at the beginning of the next chapter:

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm then and do not let yourselves be burdened again with a yoke of slavery.

View Details

Galatians Talk 5 Galatians 3:1-29

As we saw when we were studying the first two chapters of Galatians, Paul wrote his letter to them because of the dangerous teaching that had crept into the churches there – that obedience to the law of the Old Testament was essential to salvation.

In chapter 1 he insists that:

· the only true gospel is the one that he has preached to them (6-10)

· he had received it by direct revelation from God and not from any human source (11-24).

In chapter 2 he tells how:

· the message he preached had been accepted by the apostles at Jerusalem (1-10)

· he had opposed Peter for his inconsistent behaviour by no longer eating with Gentile Christians for fear of what the circumcision group might think of him (11-21).

These verses include the substance of what he said to Peter and form the beginning of a new section of his letter where he gives theological reasons for his teaching that justification is by faith and not by works.

Now, in chapter 3, Paul begins by appealing to the Galatians’ experience of the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives (1-5) and then to the experience of Abraham (6-25) to argue his case. We’ll begin by reading vv 1-5.

1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. 2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? 3 Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? 4 Have you suffered so much for nothing – if it really was for nothing? 5 Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?

Paul has already expressed his astonishment that the Galatians have so quickly turned to a different gospel from that which he had preached to them (1:6). Now, in verse 1, he reiterates his amazement and reminds them that they had been saved by believing his clear presentation of the message of Christ crucified. In verse 2 he appeals to their experience:

Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?

But what does he mean by receiving the Spirit? To understand this correctly we need to consider what happened at Pentecost when Jesus’ first disciples received the Spirit (Acts 2:1-4). This was something Jesus had promised them, and which would empower them to be his witnesses (Acts 1:4-8).

It was something promised to the converts at Pentecost if they would repent and be baptised (Acts 2:38-39).

It was so important that when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that the Samaritans had become Christians they sent Peter and John to lay hands on them so that they might receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:15-18).

And Peter describes the experience of Cornelius and his household as having received the Holy Spirit just as we have (Acts 10:47).

Finally, when Paul finds some disciples at Ephesus, he asks them, Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed? (Acts 19:2) which, of course, implies that it’s possible to believe without at the same time receiving the Spirit.

Now all these examples taken from Acts use the terminology of receiving the Spirit to refer to the supernatural experience of the baptism in the Spirit, rather than to the Spirit’s work in regeneration, but is this the way that Paul is using it here in Galatians?

In my view the answer is definitely YES. We know from Acts 19:2 that Paul used the expression in this way. And it’s unthinkable that on such an important matter Luke, who was one of Paul’s close travelling companions, should use the expression differently from Paul. And in verse 5 the reference to God giving the Spirit and working miracles seems to confirm this.

But what about verse 3, where Paul says:

After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?

Doesn’t this suggest that Paul is using receiving the Spirit to refer to their becoming Christians?

The answer to this lies in remembering that, unlike today, when people receive Christ as their saviour but very often are not baptised in water until some weeks or months later – and may or may not be baptised in the Spirit later still – most people in New Testament times would have been saved, baptised in water and baptised in the Spirit all on the same day.

So for them each of these things would have been part of their overall experience of beginning the Christian life. Right from the start their supernatural experience of being baptised in the Spirit was part and parcel of what it meant to be a Christian.

Assuming this to be the case with the Galatians, we can now understand Paul as saying:

You know from your experience of how the Holy Spirit works that it is not in response to human effort, but in response to faith. This is true of how you received the baptism in the Spirit and of the miraculous ways God works in your lives. The same is true of your salvation. You are saved by faith and not by works.

Moving on now to verses 6-9, we find Paul using quotes from the Pentateuch to make several points with regard to Abraham. This would be particularly significant for the circumcision group as it was to Abraham that God first gave circumcision as a sign of the covenant he had made with him. He points out that:

· Abraham was counted righteous (justified) because of his faith. He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (6)

· As a result, it’s those who believe who are children of Abraham (7)

· When God promised Abraham that through him all nations will be blessed (8), it revealed God’s intention to justify the Gentiles by faith

· So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith (9).

And how are they blessed? By being declared righteous in God’s sight, just as Abraham was, by faith, and as a result be able to receive the promise of the Spirit by faith (14).

This is in direct contrast to those who rely on observing the law (10). They are cursed rather than blessed. In verse 10 he says:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."

The people who were insisting that circumcision was essential to salvation were relying on the law to save them. But the problem with this is that the law itself says that everyone who does not obey everything in it is cursed. So Paul is saying, If you think you can be saved by obeying the law, remember that you must obey everything in it! And since you can’t, you are cursed, not saved.

11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." 12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."

What’s more, says Paul, the Old Testament itself teaches that you can’t be saved by obeying the law, because it says in Habakkuk 2:4 that the righteous will live by faith. But the law isn’t based on faith, but on obedience to it, because it says that the man who does these things will live by them. So salvation by the law, if that were possible, would be dependent on obedience to all of it. And if we’re not, we’re under its curse. But, thank God, Christ has redeemed us from that.

13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

So what is this curse of the law that Christ has redeemed us from? It’s our failure to keep it in its entirety! As we shall see later, the purpose of the law was to highlight our disobedience to God and to point to our need of a Saviour. By his substitutionary death on the cross Christ has borne the penalty that our disobedience to God deserves.

If we understand this verse correctly in its context, we see that by the curse of the law Paul is not referring to specific curses contained within the law (e.g. Deuteronomy 28), but to the fact that, unless we keep every part of it, the law places us under God’s curse.

But, thank God, he has redeemed us from the curse of the law, and his purpose in redeeming us is not just negative. In verse 14 we read that:

He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

Paul then proceeds to explain in greater detail what he has been saying by using the illustration of a covenant (15). He likens the promises God made to Abraham and his seed to a covenant that cannot be broken, and he clarifies that the use of the word seed in the singular implies that it refers to just one person, not many, and that person is Christ (16).

It is in Christ that all the nations of the world will be blessed (cf. 7). The law, which came 430 years after God made this promise to Abraham, does not do away with God’s covenant promise (17). And since the blessing depends on God’s gracious promise, it cannot be dependent on keeping the law (18). (Therefore, salvation is not dependent on circumcision).

So what was the point of the law? Paul gives his answer in verses 19-23. It was a temporary addition until Christ came (19). It was not opposed to God’s promises, but the problem with the law was that it couldn’t impart life (21) because the whole world is a prisoner of sin (22).

So the only way that the promise can be received is by faith in Jesus Christ. And until he came everyone was imprisoned by the law (23). As we shall see next time, Paul will go on the clarify this in the opening verses of chapter 4, but first he seems to want to break away from his discussion of the shortcomings of the law in order to remind us of the blessings of faith in Christ.

We’re all children of God

26 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus,

We’re identified with Christ

27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Your identity is not in your nationality, social status, or even your gender. It’s in Christ!

We belong to Christ. We’re the true children of Abraham. We have a wonderful inheritance

29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

View Details

Galatians Talk 4 Galatians 2

So far in this series we have seen that Paul’s purpose in writing Galatians was to correct a serious doctrinal error. Some were teaching that faith in Christ was not sufficient for salvation and that obedience to the law of the Old Testament, especially with regard to circumcision, was required as well. The situation was so serious that Paul went so far as to say that if anybody preached a gospel other than the one that he had preached and which the Galatians had accepted, they should be eternally condemned!

If this seems rather strong, we need to remember that our only hope of salvation is through believing that Jesus took the punishment our sins deserved when he died on the cross. This and this alone is all that is necessary for salvation. To teach that something else is necessary is to deny the efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice (v21) and encourages people to put their hope in a false ‘gospel’ by trying to get right with God by our own good works.

In defence of the gospel he preached, Paul begins in chapter 1 by making it clear to his readers that:

· He had not received it from any human source.

· He had received it from Jesus Christ himself by personal revelation.

And as we saw last time, Paul’s determination not only to preach that message, but also to defend it at all costs, was emboldened by three things:

He remembered the futility of his old way of life
His sole desire was to please God
He knew God had called him.

Now, as we move into chapter 2, Paul continues to speak of his own experience (1-10).

He bases his argument against the need for circumcision on the fact that when he had gone up to Jerusalem to visit Peter, James and John:

· They had not compelled Titus to be circumcised although he was Gentile (3)

· They had added nothing to his message (6)

· They had endorsed his ministry to the Gentiles (7-10).

It was important for Paul to stress these things because the Judaizers, with their insistence on obedience to the Jewish law, probably felt a loyalty to the apostles in Jerusalem and he needed to make it clear that they had endorsed his message. These points will become clear as we now read verses 1-10, which I shall read without further comment.

Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek.

4 [This matter arose] because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5 We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

6 As for those who seemed to be important - whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance - those men added nothing to my message.

7 On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews. 8 For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10 All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.

However, although Paul was glad of the approval of these brothers, he was not afraid to point out the inconsistency of Peter on these matters. In verses 11-13 he says:

11 When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

Peter

Peter was afraid and hypocritical. He was not infallible. He was in the wrong.

He was still capable of giving in to the fear of what others might think of him (cf. his denial of Jesus).

This was after Jesus had forgiven him and after he had been filled with the Spirit at Pentecost.

This shows that the baptism in the Spirit is not an experience of entire sanctification, as some have taught.

If our actions are not consistent with our professed beliefs, we may lead others astray.

Paul

Paul was not afraid to confront Peter publicly.

He opposed him to his face (not behind his back).

He told Peter first, before telling others about it (e.g. writing to the Galatians).

Confronting people when they are in the wrong takes courage. But if we don’t speak up, we may be guilty of condoning their attitude and actions by our silence.

The beginning of the theological argument (15-21)

Having made his case from his own personal experience, Paul now uses the substance of what he had said to Peter to begin his theological argument.

"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16 know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified. 17 "If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. 19 For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

I’m not intending to deal with all these verses in detail. We’ll be concentrating on verses 19-20. But first my attempt at a paraphrase of verses 15-18, the meaning of which is not immediately clear.

15-16 Paul appeals to the experience of his Jewish Christian readers. They have put their faith in Jesus Christ and they know that no one can be saved by observing the law.

17 But that doesn’t mean that, although we still sometimes sin after we are saved, the gospel of salvation through faith in Christ is promoting sin (cf. Romans 6:1).

18 If we rebuild the law after we have rejected it as a way of salvation, by our inability to keep it we will only prove that we are breakers of the law.

But now let’s turn our attention to verses 19-20.

19 For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God.

What does Paul mean by died to the law?

It’s probably best to understand this as meaning that Paul started to think of himself as dead as far as the law was concerned. Compare Romans 6:11, where he says something similar:

In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

As we shall see later in the series, the law was given to make us aware of our need of Christ because of our inability to keep it in its entirety. We are to think of ourselves as dead to the law because obedience to it cannot save us.

When Paul was confronted by the risen Christ on the Damascus Road, the direction of his life was completely changed. Until then he had been preoccupied with obedience to the law and his understanding of it had led him to persecute Christ’s followers (Acts 22:3-4). But once he had met Christ he began to see himself as dead as far as the law was concerned because now he was to live in obedience to Christ. His question in Acts 22:10, Lord, what shall I do? makes this clear. And when we come to chapter 5 we’ll see how all this works out in practice.

Like Paul we are to think of ourselves as dead to the law and dead to sin. This is because of what Paul says in verse 20:

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

The Greek verb that’s used here is sustauroo. It’s the same verb as is used in the Gospels where we’re told that there were two thieves crucified with Jesus (Matthew 27:44). The Greek word for cross is stauros and stauroo means to crucify. The prefix su- or sun- means with. So sustauroo means to crucify with… Now there are at least ten Greek verbs in the New Testament that begin with the prefix su- or sun- and which speak of different aspects of our relationship or identification with Christ.

This would be a whole series of studies in itself, but here’s a quick summary. The New Testament teaches that we:

· Were crucified with Christ (Galatians 2:20, Romans 6:6)

· Were buried with Christ (in baptism) (Colossians 2:12, Romans 6:4)

· Have been raised with Christ (Ephesians 2:6, Colossians 2:12, 3:1)

· Have been made alive with Christ (Ephesians 2:5, Colossians 2:13)

· Are seated with Christ (Ephesians 2:6)

· Are joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17)

· Suffer with Christ (Romans 8:17)

· Will reign with Christ (2 Timothy 2:12)

· Will be glorified with Christ (Romans 8:17).

At first sight, this subject of our identification with Christ is rather difficult to understand. So let me explain it like this. When Jesus came to earth he identified himself with humanity. At his baptism, although he was sinless, he identified himself with sinners. At Calvary he offered himself as a sacrifice for our sin. He was, in effect, saying to God, Let my death count as their death. The penalty for sin is death (Romans 6:23), but because Jesus’ death counts as ours, the penalty has already been paid. By faith we are made righteous in God’s sight. He sees us as he sees Jesus. By his death on the cross Jesus identified himself with us. When we believe this and accept him as our Saviour, we identify ourselves with him.

With this in mind, let’s go back to Galatians 2:20

20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Because Jesus loved us and gave himself for us, and because we have put our faith in him, we are identified with him. We are in Christ and Christ lives in us. By accepting him as our Saviour we accepted his death as our death (and that’s why our sins are all forgiven). So if his death was our death, we’re dead! We no longer live, but Christ lives in us.

And finally in verse 21 Paul makes the obvious point in defence of his gospel, if it were possible to be saved by obeying the law, there was no point in Christ dying for us.

But thank God, he did. And because he did, and because by accepting him we identified ourselves with him, we should think of ourselves as dead. Dead to thinking that we can save ourselves by our good works. And dead to sin, because Christ now lives within us.

How can we live our lives by faith in the Son of God?

By remembering that he loved us and gave himself for us.

That’s my motivation for living.

I hope it’s yours too.

View Details

Galatians. Talk 3.

Galatians 1:10-24

In the first two talks we noted that Paul’s purpose in writing Galatians was to correct a serious doctrinal error that had crept into the churches since Paul had planted them. Paul had taught them that we are saved by faith in Jesus, and not by observing the law of the Old Testament, but some were now teaching that circumcision was necessary for salvation, and Paul was amazed that they had so quickly turned away from what he had taught them.

The version of the ‘gospel’ these people were teaching was radically different from the gospel Paul preached and the situation was so serious that Paul went so far as to say that if anybody preached a gospel other than the one that he had preached and which they had accepted, let them be eternally condemned!

And Paul had good reason to speak this strongly. The truth of the gospel was at stake – the gospel for which Christ had died, the gospel which is the only way by which we may be saved. In later chapters Paul would give good theological reasons in defence of the gospel he preached, but first he wanted to make it clear to his readers that:

· He had not received it from any human source.

· He had received it from Jesus Christ himself by personal revelation.

This is the main purpose of what he writes in today’s passage, which we’ll read first before considering each of these two points in turn.

Galatians 1:10-24

10. Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

11. I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

13. For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14. I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.

15. But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased 16. to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, 17. nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus.

18. Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. 19. I saw none of the other apostles – only James, the Lord's brother.

20. I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie. 21. Later I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22. I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23. They only heard the report: "The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy." 24. And they praised God because of me.

He had not received it from any human source

In verse 11 Paul says:

the gospel I preached is not something that man made up.

This is so important that he repeats it in three different ways:

I did not receive it from any man (12)

nor was I taught it (12)

I did not consult any man 16).

He wants the Galatians (and us) to know this (11), because believing the true gospel is the only way of salvation. A man-made gospel will save no one! The good news of salvation through faith has its origin in heaven and was received by revelation from heaven. It was God who had set Paul apart and called him by his grace and who had been pleased to reveal his Son in and through Paul (15-16).

So in verses 17-22 Paul emphasises that immediately after his conversion he went into Arabia before returning to Damascus. It was not until three years after that, that he went to Jerusalem where he stayed with Peter for fifteen days and also met James, the Lord’s brother. Paul’s purpose in saying this is to stress that he did not receive his gospel from anyone, not even Peter or James, as he did not meet them until at least three years after his conversion, but in case anyone is inclined to doubt him he says in verse 20:

I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

He had received it from Jesus Christ himself by personal revelation

The gospel Paul preached came directly from Jesus Christ by supernatural revelation. That’s why he was so determined to defend it. In today’s passage we see three things that emboldened that determination:

He remembered the futility of his old way of life
His sole desire was to please God
He knew God had called him

He remembered the futility of his old way of life

He was in Judaism (13, 14). Note how Paul is already referring to Judaism as distinct from Christianity. Judaism had been his way of life (13). He was advancing in it (14). He was extremely zealous for its traditions (14). His sole aim was to please men (10).

But now he was in Christ. Christ was now his way of life (cf. 2:20). His sole aim now was to please him.

Once we give our lives to Jesus, there’s no turning back.

His sole desire was to please God.

10. Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

Notice the words now and still. Before his conversion Paul’s aim was to please men, but now he is a servant of Christ. His sole motive was to please God. There was no hidden agenda. He was not politically motivated. If we’re intent on pleasing other people or worried what they will think about us if we don’t do the kind of things they do, our determination to follow Jesus will be weakened. Our motive in all that we do must be to please God. As we offer our bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, and pleasing to God, we will be able to test and approve what God’s will is – his good, pleasing and perfect will (Romans 12:1-2).

He knew God had called him

15. But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased 16. to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles…

But when God

Paul had been extremely zealous for the traditions of his ancestors (14), but when God… Because he had been such a fanatical opponent of Christianity, Paul was ever conscious that it was God who had initiated his conversion. It was God who had who set him apart from birth, and called him by his grace, and had been pleased to reveal his Son in him.

set me apart from birth

Literally, from my mother’s womb. How did Paul know this? Perhaps like Jeremiah (1:5) the Lord had told him so. The fact that God has a purpose for our lives from before we were born does not mean that we are predestined to do what he tells us. We all have a choice as to whether we will obey him when he calls us. As Paul later said to King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision.

called me by his grace

It is by grace that we are saved, through faith, and that not of ourselves – it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2). If it were not for God’s grace we could not be saved. And it’s because of the grace of God that all we have to do is have faith – and even that is given to us by God. What’s more, it is by grace that we are called to serve him. It’s a privilege to be a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ.

reveal his Son in me

We might have expected Paul to say to me rather than in me. Of course, God did reveal his Son to Paul on the Damascus Road. But He revealed Jesus to him in order that he might reveal him in him (or through him). God makes himself real to us so that through us others might know him too.

so that I might preach him among the Gentiles

This was God’s specific purpose for Paul. It was made clear to him right from the start. The book of Acts reveals how that purpose unfolded step by step in Paul’s life. After the initial call which motivated his entire Christian life, Paul received guidance from the Holy Spirit as and when he needed it.

Conclusion

Paul’s purpose in today’s passage was to make clear that the message he preached did not come from man, but by supernatural revelation from the Lord Jesus Christ. At the heart of that message is the wonderful truth that we are not saved by obedience to the law of the Old Testament, but by trusting Jesus as our Saviour. Paul’s determination not only to preach that message, but also to defend it at all costs, was emboldened by three things:

He remembered the futility of his old way of life
His sole desire was to please God
He knew God had called him.

And as we shall see next time, his calling to preach that message was confirmed by other apostles in Chapter 2.

View Details

JESUS CHRIST, THE RULER OF THE KINGS OF THE EARTH

As I was thinking and praying about the message I should bring on the weekend of the coronation of King Charles III, a phrase from Revelation 1:5 came to my mind:

JESUS CHRIST, THE RULER OF THE KINGS OF THE EARTH.

Of course, the word king is used in a variety of ways, but its general meaning is someone who rules and it’s in that sense that we’ll be looking at it today. But first, let’s read Revelation 1:4-8.

4 John, To the seven churches in the province of Asia: Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father - to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen. 7 Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen.8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

Notice that this passage has something to say about:

· King Charles, who is one of the kings of the earth.

· The Lord Jesus Christ, the king of kings, who is the ruler of the kings of the earth.

· Us Christians who as Christ’s church are a kingdom of priests.

A. The kings of the earth (5)

Of course, King Charles is just one example. But let’s not to concentrate on King Charles. Rather, let’s take a brief look at what the Bible says about kings and rulers in general. Much of what we say will apply to King Charles – I’ll leave it to you to decide how much – but in many mays it’s more applicable to those who hold high office in government. Please notice 4 things:

1. Their authority to rule is God-given

Romans 13:1

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

Of course, we know that historically this has been used to insist that kings derived their authority from God and could not therefore be held accountable for their actions by any earthly authority. King James I of England (1603-25), for example. Fortunately, we know that her late majesty Queen Elizabeth II understood her role as one of servanthood, and there are indications that King Charles will be adopting the same approach. Indeed, in our constitutional system, the power of the monarch is extremely limited anyway.

However, the NT clearly teaches that God himself is the source of all authority, and that all human authority is delegated from him. That’s why as Christians we should obey the laws, pay our taxes etc., unless, of course, the law of the state is contrary to God’s law. But those to whom God has given authority are ultimately accountable to God for the way in which they handle that authority and are responsible for the wellbeing of their people.

2. Their accountability to their ruler

As we have seen, verse 5 describes the Lord Jesus as the ruler of the kings of the earth. He is the king to whom all other kings are accountable. He is the King of kings. The late queen was very conscious of this, and it is said of Queen Victoria that she hoped that the Lord would return in her lifetime so that she could be the first to cast down her crown at his feet. If only world leaders were equally aware of their accountability to him.

3. Their responsibility for the wellbeing of their people

Some of the parables Jesus told teach clearly that we are all accountable to God for our use of the things he has entrusted to us. This is particularly true of those who are in authority. The more we have been entrusted with, the more is required of us. Read Ezekiel 34 to see what God says about the shepherds (i.e. kings) of Israel, who had looked after themselves rather than caring for the people.

4. Our responsibility to those in authority

a) We should pray for them

I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people, for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness (1 Timothy 2:2)

b) We should submit to them

Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and commend those who do right (1 Peter 2:13).

c) We should honour them

Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honour the emperor (1 Peter 2:17).

B. JESUS – The ruler of the kings of the earth (5)

WHAT HE IS:

The ruler of the kings of the earth

The kings of the earth are temporal. They live, they die. And their authority perishes with them. But Jesus is eternal. Before Abraham was, I AM. He always has been, and he always will be, and his power and authority will never end.

1 Timothy 1:17

Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

1 Timothy 6:15-16

God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honour and might forever. Amen.

N.B. Here God is described as the only ruler. But in Revelation 1:5 Jesus is described as the ruler of the kings of the earth. This is just one of many evidences for the deity of Christ.

The Eternal Son of God

Grace and peace to you from

him who is, and who was, and who is to come

and from the seven spirits before his throne,

and from Jesus Christ (4-5).

Cf. verse 8

"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

The faithful witness

Jesus said that the reason he came into the world was to bear witness to the truth (John 18:37). His word is reliable. You can count on it. Everything he ever said was true. And because he wouldn’t deny the truth, they crucified him. But God raised him from the dead. Jesus was vindicated! He had said that he would rise from the dead, and he did. And he has promised eternal life to those who believe him. Because he lives, we shall live also. You can rely on what he says. He’s the faithful witness.

The firstborn from the dead

Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

Compare Colossians 1:18 where he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

And in verse 15 he is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. Everything in heaven and earth was created by him and for him (16). He is before all things, and in him all things hold together (17). In short:

He is supreme in the church. He is supreme in the earth. He is supreme in heaven. He is supreme over death itself.

And in 1 Corinthians 15 Paul tells us that his victory over death is the basis of our victory too:

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his turn, Christ the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him (1 Corinthians 15:23).

WHAT HE HAS DONE FOR US:

He has freed us from our sins by his blood (5)

We have all sinned, but because Jesus died for us, when we accept him as our Saviour we are freed from the penalty of sin.

He has made us a kingdom, and priests to serve his God and Father (6)

More of this in a moment.

He has promised to come again (7)

7 Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen.

The details need not concern us. What matters is:

· He is coming

· Those who rejected him will know they were wrong

· There will be ultimate justice

· But we have nothing to fear because he has freed us from our sins…

And all this is because he loves us (v5).

C. YOU AND I as part of the church, a kingdom of priests

6…and has made us to be a kingdom, and priests to serve his God and Father - to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.

1 Peter 2:9-10

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession…

Revelation 5:9-10

And they sang a new song: "You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth."

Note: he has made us… you have made them… We’re already a kingdom of priests.

But they will reign on the earth.

Exactly what this will mean in the age to come has not been revealed, but 2 Peter 3:13 tells us that

In keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth wherein righteousness dwells.

All earthly rulers are temporary.

Only Christ the supreme ruler is the King Eternal.

We, as Christians, are already part of his kingdom – a kingdom of priests with direct access to God.

But in the age to come WE WILL REIGN WITH HIM.

View Details

Galatians Talk 2. Galatians 1:6-9

In our first talk we began by looking at three reasons why Galatians is important:

It has made a significant impact on the history of the church

It’s the first thing Paul wrote explaining that salvation is by faith and not by works

It's of practical relevance to our daily lives.

We then made a start on the text by reading the first 6 verses:

1. Paul, an apostle - sent not from men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead 2. and all the brothers with me, To the churches in Galatia: 3. Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4. who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5. to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. 6. I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel.

We noted that Paul’s purpose in writing was to correct a serious doctrinal error that had crept into the churches since Paul had planted them. Paul had taught them that we are saved by faith in Jesus, and not by observing the law of the Old Testament, but some were now teaching that circumcision was now necessary for salvation, and Paul was amazed that they had so quickly turned away from what he had taught them (6). And that’s where we pick up the reading today. Let’s read verses 6-7.

6. I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel –

7. which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.

v 6 I am astonished

After the customary greeting at the beginning of his letters, Paul usually says something to commend his readers, even if later he has to say something to correct or rebuke them, but the problem in Galatia is so serious that he moves straight into the issue he urgently needs to deal with. He is astonished, astounded, appalled at what they are doing. There are some issues in church life where we need to be direct, although the usual approach to those who need to be corrected is gentleness (6:1).

so quickly deserting

He’s astonished that they’re departing from the gospel he preached to them, but particularly that they’re doing it so quickly. It wasn’t long since they had heard and received his message of salvation by faith in Christ, but they had soon moved away from it when they heard a different ‘gospel’.

the one who called you

But they were not only rejecting the true gospel. They were rejecting the one who had called them. But what does Paul mean by the one? Does he mean himself or Christ? Of course, it is Christ who calls us to salvation and the rejection of Christ is far more serious than the rejection of his messengers. But Jesus did say to his disciples, Whoever rejects you rejects me (Luke 10:16), so is there a double – or even treble – meaning here? In rejecting Paul’s message, they were rejecting the messenger, and in rejecting the messenger they were rejecting Christ, the one who sent him.

What should we do when people reject our message? Paul was certainly exasperated by the behaviour of the Galatians, but he did not desert them. He felt responsible for them and cared enough to warn them of the serious consequences if they continued to reject his message.

by the grace of Christ

As Christ’s messenger, Paul had called them by the grace of Christ. Grace, the unmerited favour of God, was the heart of Paul’s message. On his first visit to Galatia he had preached that

Through Jesus, the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses (Acts 13:38-39).

And this was the message of his grace (14:3).

If the churches he is writing to in Galatians are the same as those he planted in these chapters in Acts, they had certainly already heard Paul’s message of justification by faith.

and are turning to a different gospel

But now they are turning to a different gospel. The word Paul uses for different is heteros, which means another. In Greek there are two different words for another:

heteros which means another of a different kind

and

allos which means another of the same kind.

Paul uses both these words in verses 6-7. In verse 6 he says that the Galatians are turning to another gospel. Here he uses heteros. Their so called ‘gospel’ of justification by obeying the law of Moses was a totally different kind of gospel than that which Paul preached, justification by faith. Gospel (euangelion in Greek) means good news. And their insistence that for a man to be saved he must be circumcised as well as believe was certainly not good news!

In most countries today circumcision is probably not the issue that it was back then, but any insistence that any ritual baptism, communion for example is essential to salvation is a false gospel. We should be baptised and take communion because Jesus commanded it, but it's only faith that saves us.

v 7 which is really no gospel at all

In fact their ‘gospel’ was really no gospel at all. Translated literally, what he says is:

which is not another.

Here Paul uses allos (another of the same kind). Their ‘gospel’ is not the same kind at all. It’s bad news, not good news.

some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ

Any teaching that detracts from the simplicity of the true gospel of salvation by grace through faith is in fact a perversion and will only lead to confusion. In 1 Corinthians 14:33 Paul tells us that God is not the author of confusion, but of peace. It was God the Holy Spirit who brought order out of chaos (Genesis 1:1).

8. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned

9. As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

But even if we…

In effect, Paul is saying, Even if I start preaching a different gospel, don't believe it! The message of the gospel is more important than the messenger, however impressive their credentials, their personality, or their presentation. It’s the truth of the message that validates the messenger.

or an angel from heaven

This may reflect the Jewish belief that the law had been given through angelic mediators (cf. Acts 7:38) but is more likely to be connected with the fact that Satan masquerades as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14). Confusion is his work and he’s still in the confusion business today. What Bible believing Christian can fail to see the hand of Satan in the upheaval of moral standards that has taken place in recent decades, as biblical revelation has been rejected, even in some churches, and replaced with the mistaken ideas of godless people? Those who bring confusion, whether it’s into the churches or into society at large would do well to heed Paul’s urgent warning in these verses:

But why the repetition? This may be just for emphasis, but As we have already said (9) may well be a reference to his teaching when he had planted the churches. However, the two verses are not entirely identical:

Verse 8 refers to the gospel he had preached.

Verse 9 refers to the gospel they had accepted.

Paul had not only preached the true gospel, but the Galatians had accepted it.

let him be eternally condemned

The word Paul uses here is anathema. He uses it in Romans 9:3 where he says that he could wish himself accursed from Christ if only his fellow Jews might be saved. The plain sense there is that he would have been willing to sacrifice his own salvation if only it could achieve theirs. And in 1 Corinthians 16:22 he uses it to say, If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ let them be accursed. So the NIV translation, eternally condemned, here in Galatians, does not seem inappropriate.

But did Paul really want anyone to be eternally condemned? If it sounds like it here, we need to remember that Paul had dedicated his life to preaching the gospel so that others might be saved. If his words seem harsh, we should remind ourselves that God himself, who is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance, will not force salvation on anyone. He has provided the way of salvation through faith in the atoning death of Christ, but, if that is rejected, Jesus said those who do not believe are condemned already (John 3:18). This is because the only way of salvation is through faith in Christ – and that’s because only Christ was capable of saving us.

So here in Galatians Paul is only affirming what God has already said. Those who were teaching, and those who were believing, a different ‘gospel’ were denying the total efficacy of Christ’s death on the cross, and to reject that is to reject the salvation that it offers. And as Paul says elsewhere, Their condemnation is just (Romans 3:8).

This matter is so important, and Paul cares so much about those he had led to Christ, that he urges them to reject the false gospel of the Judaizers and to return to the gospel by which they had been saved in the first place. Salvation is dependent on accepting the gospel. We cannot lose our salvation, but this passage shows that we can reject it by rejecting the gospel we once believed.

Paul’s teaching throughout Galatians reminds us of the urgency of both believing (and continuing to believe) and preaching the one true gospel of salvation through faith in Christ. We will return to this theme again and again, but as we do so perhaps we should ask ourselves how seriously we are taking our responsibility of sharing this truth with others.

View Details

Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Talk 1. Why Galatians is important

Welcome to a new series of talks in which we will be studying Paul’s letter to the Galatians. In this talk we’ll be looking at the first five verses, but I’ll begin by giving you three reasons why Galatians is important.

1. It has made a significant impact on the history of the church

It's clear from what Paul writes in the letter that the young Christian Church was facing very real problems. Christianity had its beginnings in Judaism and the majority of the first Christians were Jewish. But as more and more Gentiles became Christians the question arose as to whether the Gentile Christians needed to obey all the laws of the Old Testament.

The most significant of these was the Jewish rite of circumcision, and some were insisting that Gentiles who became Christians needed to be circumcised if they were to be saved (Acts 15:1). The matter was so serious that the apostles convened a special meeting to discuss the matter, sometimes referred to as the council of Jerusalem, details of which are given us in Acts 15. It was probably around this time (AD49) that Paul wrote his letter to the churches in Galatia, where the problem was particularly acute. Humanly speaking, if the church had insisted on circumcision, Christianity would have made little impact on the Gentiles and almost certainly would never have grown to become the world’s largest religion as it is today.

And Galatians was again to become highly significant in church history several hundred years later, when, as a result of reading it, an Augustinian friar named Martin Luther (1483-1546) became convinced that Christians are saved through faith, and not as a result of their own efforts, which is the main theme of the letter.

2. It’s the first thing Paul wrote explaining that salvation is by faith and not by works

In the first two chapters, speaking from his experience, Paul insists that his apostolic authority comes from none other than God himself (1:1), and that the gospel he preaches is the only true gospel (1:6-10), because he received it by revelation from Jesus (11-12), not as a result of human consultation (1:16). Only later, in response to a revelation, did he go up to Jerusalem and set before the church leaders there the gospel that he preached to the Gentiles (2:1-2) and Titus, who was a Gentile Christian accompanying Paul, was not compelled to be circumcised (2:3). In fact, James, Peter, and John had recognised the special ministry that God had given to Paul to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (2:7-9) and in 2:15-16 Paul reports how he had said to them:

We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

Having recounted his own experience in chapters 1 and 2, at the beginning of chapter 3 Paul appeals to the Galatians’ own experience of how the Holy Spirit works among them, not because they observe the law but because they believe (1-6). This is followed in the rest of chapter 3 and throughout chapter 4, by a theological explanation of why we are made right with God, not by our good works, but by our trusting in Jesus, something which Paul develops later in greater detail in his letter to the Romans. But that leads us to the third reason why Galatians is important:

3. It's of practical relevance to our daily lives

Paul’s teaching that justification is by faith and not by works is not just a theological theory. It’s of vital importance to our lives, and not only to our initial experience of salvation, but also to how we live our Christian lives from day to day. So in chapters 5 and 6 Paul offers a practical application of all he’s been saying in the first four chapters.

Christ has set us free from the law of the Old Testament and we’re not to let ourselves get tangled up in it again (5:1). We’re free from it, but we’re not to use our freedom as an excuse for wrong-doing. The important thing is to serve one another in love (5:13) because love fulfils all the requirements of the law (5:14). In fact, the whole law can be summarised in the commandment, Love your neighbour as yourself. We can do this if we live by the Spirit, and if we live by the Spirit we are not under the law (16-18).

In verses 19-21 Paul lists what he calls the works of the flesh – the kind of things the Spirit will not prompt us to do – and in verses 22-23 he tells us of those things which will be evident in our lives if we follow the leading of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. He calls these the fruit of the Spirit.

Finally, in chapter 6, we fulfil the law of Christ (2) (the law of love)

· by gently restoring those who have sinned (1)

· by carrying each other’s burdens (2)

· by carrying our own burdens (4)

· by pleasing the Spirit (8)

· by doing good to all (10).

Of course there is far more in Galatians than the brief summary I have given so far, and we’ll be looking at each chapter in more detail in future talks. But I hope I’ve said enough to persuade you that Galatians is well worth studying, because, as we have seen:

It has made a significant impact on the history of the church

It’s the first thing Paul wrote explaining that salvation is by faith and not by works

It's of practical relevance to our daily lives.

But now, let’s make a start by reading the first six verses of chapter 1.

Paul, an apostle

Paul begins his letter with his name, which was the custom at the time (unlike our custom of leaving our name until the end of a letter). He then immediately reminds the Galatians of his apostolic calling. (For a detailed study of apostles in the New Testament, please see Body Builders – Gifts to make God’s people grow, Chapter Two). The word apostolos in Greek literally means someone who is sent, but usually carried the idea of someone who had been given special authority to speak on behalf of someone else, rather like an ambassador. The more important the person he was representing, the more important the ambassador himself, and Paul knew that he was representing the highest authority of all.

sent not from men nor by man

Acts records how, before his conversion, Paul had already been an ambassador – an ambassador sent by man to persecute the church (Acts 9:1-2, 22:4-5, 26:9-12).

but by Jesus Christ and God the Father

But now he is God’s ambassador. He needs to remind the Galatians of this, because they had so quickly moved away from the truth of the gospel he had preached to them and in doing so had deserted him (v6).

who raised him from the dead

It was the risen Christ who had appeared to Paul on the Damascus Road and given him his apostolic authority.

v.2 and all the brothers with me

We don’t know who these brothers were as Paul does not name them and we can’t be sure of the exact timing of the letter. However, despite the apostolic authority he had been given, Paul was not a loner. Whatever our gifting, we all need the fellowship, encouragement and support of fellow Christians. Perhaps Paul’s reason for mentioning them here is to stress that, although the Galatians were deserting him, there were still those who were loyal to him and the message he preached.

To the churches in Galatia

There has been some debate as to who these churches were. Those who are interested should consult the commentaries. But what’s important is that they were churches that Paul had planted and had originally received gladly his message of salvation through faith in Christ and not by observance of the law.

v.3 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ

Paul often sent this greeting at the beginning of his letters, but this was no mere formality. It’s a measure of the stature of the man that he could speak grace and peace over those who were rejecting his message.

v.4 who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father

the present evil age

Since the coming of Jesus the Christian message has transformed society wherever it has been accepted, yet who can doubt, as we look at the world around us today, that we are still living in the present evil age of which Paul speaks in this verse? Yet there is hope in this verse, because it’s the present age that is evil. The Bible is very clear that things will be different in the age to come!

who gave himself for our sins to rescue us

We have all played our part in contributing to the evil of this present age. We all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. But Jesus came to rescue us. He did this by giving himself for our sins. He did this by dying on the cross and taking on himself the punishment our sins deserved. In doing so he has rescued us from the penalty of sin, he continues to rescue us from the power of sin, and one day, in the age to come, he will rescue us from the presence of sin.

according to the will of our God and Father

And he did this according to the will of God. God wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4). But, as Paul tells us throughout Galatians, a vital aspect of the truth is that salvation is through faith and not by works. How grateful we should be for that! Our good works could never save us, but by his death on the cross Jesus has made salvation available to all who will believe. No wonder Paul could say in verse 5:

to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Next time, we’ll pick up where we left off, beginning with verse 6.

View Details

Dr David Petts preaching at Brixham Community Church, 19th March 2023.

"May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit."

Romans 15:13

View Details

It is finished (John 19:30)

The Death of Jesus

28 Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty."

29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips.

30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

IT IS FINISHED

What was?

His earthly life - v. 30 With that he bowed his head and gave up his spirit But far, far more than that! It was the end of much, much more.

The old covenant that God had made with his people, the Jews

Hebrews 8:7-13

7 … if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.

8 But God found fault with the people and said (in Jeremiah 31:31-34): "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.

9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.

10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.

11 No longer will a man teach his neighbour, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.

12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."

13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete…

The OT is a revelation of the old covenant that God made with his people, but the OT itself promised that the day would come when God would make a new and better covenant with them.

We are not living under the old covenant that God made with the Jewish people, but under the new covenant which is sealed with the blood of Jesus.

When Jesus died on the cross he declared, IT IS FINISHED (John 19:30). The word 'finished' here means 'accomplished' or 'completed'.

Jesus had completed the work his Father had given him to do. His death on the cross provided atonement for our sins and was the fulfilment of all OT law. His finished work on the cross is the basis for the new covenant which extends beyond the Jews to the Gentiles as well…

The barrier between Jew and Gentile Ephesians 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one, and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility

The barrier between God and man Matthew 27 :51

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom The written code that was against us Colossians 2 :13-14 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having cancelled the written code, with its regulations that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.

The tyranny of the principalities and powers Colossians 2 :15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

The power and fear of death Hebrews 2 :14-15

…he too shared in (our) humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death – that is the devil – and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

‘Tis finished! The Messiah dies, cut off for sins, but not his own.

Accomplished is the sacrifice, the great redeeming work is done.

‘Tis finished! All the debt is paid. Justice divine is satisfied,

The grand and full atonement made. God for a guilty world has died.

The veil is rent in Christ alone. The living way the heaven is seen.

The middle wall is broken down and all mankind may enter in.

The types and figures are fulfilled. Exacted is the legal pain.

The precious promises are sealed. The spotless Lamb of God is slain.

The reign of sin and death is o’er, and all may live from sin set free.

Satan has lost his mortal power. ‘Tis swallowed up in victory!

Saved from the legal curse I am. My Saviour hangs on yonder tree.

See there the meek expiring Lamb. ‘Tis finished, he expires for me.

Accepted in the well-beloved and clothed in righteousness divine,

I see the bar to heaven removed, and all thy merits, Lord, are mine.

Death, hell, and sin are now subdued; all grace is now to sinners given.

And lo, I plead the atoning blood, and in thy right I claim thy heaven.

Charles Wesley

View Details

When you come together

Talk 12 Putting it all into practice

As we now turn to suggesting how we can put Paul’s teaching into practice, it will be important first to consider exactly who is responsible for doing so. And, as we look again at 1 Corinthians 14:26, it becomes immediately apparent that the verse is addressed to everyone in the church:

What then shall we say brothers and sisters? When you come together, everyone has…

So everyone has a responsibility in this matter. But that raises the important question of the role of church leaders. What exactly is their responsibility? In my book, Body Builders, I have discussed the role of church leaders in some detail [1]. There we noted that their responsibilities include shepherding the flock, instructing them in the truths of God’s word, and managing and directing the affairs of the church (1 Timothy 3:5, 5:17).

Applying these principles to 1 Corinthians 14:26, this clearly implies that, apart from any other duties they may have, church leaders have a special responsibility in ensuring that what Paul teaches is put into practice whenever Christians come together to worship the Lord. If church members are to fulfil their responsibility to participate in the meetings as Paul teaches in 14:26, church leaders will need to encourage them to do so. The purpose of this talk is to offer some guidance as to how they might do this.

Being fully persuaded in your own mind

Now that we’ve almost finished this series, the time has come for you to make up your mind. I encourage you to read again chapters 12-14 of 1 Corinthians and especially consider what implications 14:26 might have for your church. In Romans 14:5, Paul wrote:

Let everyone be fully persuaded in their own mind.

Although written in a different context, this principle is of vital importance in every area of our Christian living. We must take care that we are not tossed back and forth by the waves and blown here and there by every wind of teaching (Ephesians 4:14).

This is particularly relevant in situations where the implementation of a 14:26 style of worship could be controversial. Change often makes people feel uncomfortable, and some of them will probably tell you so. But, if you are fully persuaded in your own mind that this is what God says, you will be able to bear criticism patiently and in time, hopefully, to persuade them of the truth. That’s why it’s especially important to pray for guidance.

Praying for guidance

In making these suggestions on how we might lead our church into a more biblical way of doing things, I am well aware that every situation is different. Apart from the obvious denominational differences in styles of worship and leadership, there are sometimes very different ways of doing things in churches of the same denomination. That’s why, I have placed prayer for guidance high on our list of priorities.

Once we have grasped the truth of God’s word on the matter, we need to pray for guidance on how and when we should introduce these things. When seeking to introduce any form of change where there has been a well-established tradition, I have personally always felt it wise to take things slowly and only introduce the change after teaching clearly why the change is both biblical and necessary. But that’s something for the leaders of each local church prayerfully to decide together. Which leads us to our next point.

Consulting your fellow leaders

As I’ve just mentioned, I realise that different churches have different forms of leadership. Although I am fully persuaded that team leadership should be the aim of every local church, it’s not my intention to argue the point here, as I have already done so at some length in Body Builders. However, I would suggest that, even in churches where there is only one leader, it would be wise for that leader to consult with key people in the church before seeking to implement any major changes in the style of worship.

On the other hand, where there is already an established pastoral team, it’s important that each pastor or elder is committed to the principle of 14:26 meetings and that the team agrees on how it should be applied in their local situation. Decisions need to be made not only on how and when to introduce it, but also on how to interpret and apply Paul’s teaching, particularly where there is legitimate room for different ways of understanding what he is saying.

I have listed below some of the issues it would be wise to consider. I have already expressed my own opinion on these matters, but it’s for each leadership team to make their own decision. The sort of things I’m referring to are:

a) With regard to speaking in tongues when unbelievers come in, should there be:

No tongues at all?

Tongues only if interpreted?

Everybody speaking in tongues?

b) With regard to the gift of interpretation of tongues:

Should this sound like praise or prophecy?

What does Someone must interpret mean (v. 27)?

Should a fourth utterance in tongues be interpreted?

Should private tongues be interpreted?

c) With regard to the gift of prophecy:

How many? 2 or 3?

How do you judge it? Who should judge it?

How do you apply v.30?

And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop.

Once you have decided these issues you will need to teach them. But there may be other areas where teaching will be needed too.

Teaching the people

I have discovered from years of experience that you get what you teach for. Jesus said, You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:32). God’s people are released into freedom when they know the truths of God’s word. Few will be saved if we do not preach the gospel. Few will be healed if we do not preach about healing. And the same applies to the baptism and gifts of the Holy Spirit which are essential if our meetings are to follow the biblical pattern of 1 Corinthians 14:26.

It is vital that when people become Christians they are encouraged to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit as soon as possible after their conversion (Acts 2:38). This gives them an early introduction into the charismatic dimension of life in the Spirit . And, of course, they must be taught to keep on being filled with the Spirit on a daily basis (Ephesians 5:18, 2 Timothy 1:6).

And once people have been filled with the Spirit, it’s important that they receive teaching on spiritual gifts . It’s important that we give clear guidelines for the use of the gifts (as Paul did in 1 Corinthians 12-14). This way the people feel the security of knowing how and when they may be appropriately exercised. That’s why we need to have decided in advance what our policy will be with regard to the issues we just mentioned.

We must encourage people to exercise the gifts and lovingly correct them where necessary. The gifts are not infallible, and because we are human, people will make mistakes. But if these are corrected lovingly and sensitively, the whole congregation will feel secure under a firm but caring leadership , and those who are beginning in the gifts can learn to excel so that the church might be built up (1 Corinthians 14:12).

Finally, we need to remember that the best way to teach is by setting an example. We need not only to tell people what they should do, but, equally importantly, to show them how to do it. Some of the fastest growing churches in the world are churches where the leadership sets the example in the use of spiritual gifts . However, it’s important that leaders do not give the impression that they are the only ones that God can use in the exercise of these gifts.

Making space

And if we really want to encourage people to participate in our meetings, we must make space for them to do so. We have already acknowledged that it will be difficult to put into practice the principles taught in1 Corinthians 14:26 in a large gathering, but there is no good reason why space could not be made available for people to participate for at least a part of the meeting.

Another way to make such participation possible would be to ask the congregation to break into groups of say seven to ten people and encourage them to share together for perhaps twenty minutes or so. I once did this after teaching for six Sunday mornings on 1 Corinthians 12-14. I encouraged everyone to say at least something that might be a blessing to others, even if it was just a favourite verse of Scripture or the verse of a hymn. And I was pleased to hear afterwards how grateful the people were to have been given the opportunity to do so.

You might also consider arranging some special ‘14:26 meetings’ either on a Sunday or during the week. This could be a useful way of gradually introducing a congregation who have been unused to it to this style of worship. If you decide to do this it would be wise to tell people in advance what you're going to do and to come prepared to participate.

And of course, an obvious setting for this kind of meeting would be in home groups. However, before attempting to do so, home group leaders might well need training and teaching the principles we have already discussed.

Creating a suitable environment

Finally, it’s vital that we provide the right environment for the gifts to flourish. If as leaders we seek to create an atmosphere of love (rather than criticism) in the church , people will not be afraid to move forward in faith . In the right kind of spiritual atmosphere spiritual gifts flow naturally and easily. It is not difficult to have the faith to prophesy in a fellowship where believers love each other and want to edify one another and where the leaders will sympathetically encourage us and, if necessary, lovingly correct us as we seek to move forward in faith.

Conclusion

My purpose in this series has been to show that we should take seriously Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 14:26 and encourage a greater measure of Spirit-led congregational participation in our meetings. We have acknowledged that the things that Paul wrote are the commandments of the Lord (14:37), not just for the Christians in first century Corinth, but for us today.

In order to put 1 Corinthians 14:26 in context, and to understand more fully what Paul is saying in this verse, we have examined chapters 12-14 in some detail and have seen that there’s a supernatural dimension to the worship of the church expressed in the manifestation of supernatural gifts given by the Holy Spirit (12:1-11) and that these all spring from our being baptised in the Spirit (12:13), which is an experience promised by Jesus and described by Luke in the Book of Acts.

We saw that Paul’s teaching that the church is the body of Christ, that every member of the body is different, and that everybody is needed (12:12-30), undergirds his recommendation in 14:26 that everyone should have opportunity to contribute to the meeting.

Furthermore, his teaching that everything we do must be motivated by love (13:1-13) and that, as an expression of that love, we must always seek to put other people first (14:1-25), impinges directly on how the principles taught in 14:26 should be applied in practice. This will mean, among other things, using correctly the spiritual gifts God has given us by taking responsibility for our actions (14:26-40).

In this connection, we examined carefully Paul’s teaching on tongues, interpretation, and prophecy in chapter 14, as these are the subjects he concentrates on in that chapter and are specifically mentioned in 14:26. We sought to clarify the meaning of verses that are open to differences of interpretation and to suggest how they might be applied in practice, acknowledging that in everything we must submit to the authority of scripture (14:37).

Finally, in this talk we have offered some guidelines as to how all these things might be put into practice. Church leaders have a special responsibility in this, and, as I have said more than once already, it is not my intention to tell leaders what they should do – that is their responsibility under God. But it is my sincere prayer that what I have said may be of some help in bringing our meetings closer to God’s revealed will for what should happen when we come together.

[1] See especially the chapter on Pastors.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 11 Identifying Underlying Principles

We have now completed our examination of 1 Corinthians 12-14 with a view to seeing how Paul’s teaching in those chapters might help us better understand the verse upon which this series has been based, 1 Corinthians 14:26. In our consideration of chapter 12 we saw from the first part of the chapter that we should expect the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit in our meetings and that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is the gateway to those gifts.

In the second part of the chapter, we highlighted the principles of unity, diversity and interdependence. The different gifts we have are all given by the same Spirit, and we all belong to the same body. Every part of the body is important, and every part needs each other part.

The chief lesson that we learnt from chapter 13 is that nothing that we have and nothing that we may do is of any value without love. We also saw that, wonderful though they are, supernatural gifts have their limitations. They are neither permanent nor perfect. We know in part, and we prophesy in part. And that’s because that which is perfect has not yet come.

In chapter 14 we discovered that most of Paul’s teaching is taken up with the value and use of the gifts of tongues, interpretation, and prophecy, and so we devoted the last three talks to discussing what Paul teaches about each of these gifts in that chapter. We looked in some detail at his specific instructions and sought to clarify their meaning where that was open to possible differences of interpretation and application.

With all these things in mind, we now return to 1 Corinthians 14:26 to consider in more detail some of the things we outlined in the Introduction.

The first thing to remember about this verse is that Paul is giving guidance on what should happen in a meeting of BELIEVERS. This is clear from the overall context, from the use of the words brothers… when you come together, and from verse 24 where he says if an unbeliever comes in. So I am not suggesting that the principles taught in this verse should be applied to an EVANGELISTIC meeting, for which his recommendations might have been different.

Secondly, as I pointed out in the Introduction, the words, What then shall we say, brothers? are a recommendation rather than a criticism, as some have suggested. Clearly this is crucial to all that I am arguing in this series, but my confidence is based on Paul’s use of the same Greek phrase in verse 15 where it’s clear that Paul is making a strong recommendation.

Thirdly, in the Introduction we identified three key principles in this verse:

· Participation

· Variety

· Edification.

We will now explore these concepts in more detail.

Participation

Paul hardly needed to recommend that the Corinthians participate in their meetings. That was something they were doing already. Verse 23 seems to suggest that there were occasions when they were all speaking in tongues at the same time and this was something Paul wanted to discourage, especially in the presence of unbelievers. This is why he felt the need to limit speaking in tongues to two, or at the most, three.

The problem was not lack of participation, but too much participation in things that did not edify the church. So verse 26 is both a recognition and a recommendation. A recognition of what was already happening, and a recommendation that whatever that was, it should be done for the strengthening of the church.

But to say this is not to minimise the importance of the whole verse as a recommendation to us. Referring to the things he has listed in the verse, Paul says, All of these must be done. And they must be done for the strengthening of the church. As we saw from chapter 12, every part of the body is needed. There should always be opportunity, whenever we gather together, for the expression of the many gifts and graces that the Spirit has imparted to the members.

Of course, it would not be possible in most churches for every person present to participate in every meeting, other than to join in singing the songs and, perhaps to say an occasional Amen to what is being said by others. But there should always be opportunity for them to do so.

And they should be encouraged to do so. People are more likely to participate when time is specifically allocated for this and it’s made clear that participation is welcome. If we really want people to participate, we must make room for it, even if it means arranging smaller meetings, or, in larger meetings, breaking down into small groups for part of the service.

But, as I said in the Introduction, it’s not my intention to try to tell church leaders what they should do. If we really believe that the things that Paul has written in this chapter are the Lord’s command (37), we will find ways of implementing them that will work in our particular situation.

Variety

Paul refers to:

a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation.

These are, of course, just a representative sample of what might happen in a meeting, but they suggest three main areas:

· The musical dimension (a hymn)

· The doctrinal dimension (a word of instruction)

· The supernatural dimension (a revelation, a tongue, etc).

We have already dealt with the supernatural dimension at some length. So we will confine our attention to the musical and doctrinal dimensions.

The musical dimension

The first thing Paul refers to in 14:26 is a hymn. Actually the word in Greek is literally a psalm. A psalm has been defined as a song or poem used in worship, so the translation hymn is quite appropriate. Of course, at the time Paul was writing to the Corinthians they would not have had the vast repertoire of hymns and songs that are available to us today.

However, because of the Jewish origins of the Christian church, it’s likely that their main source of songs for worship would have been the Book of Psalms that we have in our Bible. In fact, where the word psalm is used everywhere else in New Testament it refers to one of the Psalms, so this is probably what Paul had in mind when he said:

Everyone of you has a hymn (or psalm).

But what exactly did Paul mean by this? Although we cannot be sure how this recommendation would have been applied in Corinth, there is one clear implication in what Paul is saying. Everyone should have the opportunity to contribute to the worship by having a song. But how do you have a song? This surely means more than joining in the songs chosen in advance by the pastor or worship leader! And Paul is hardly suggesting that everyone should have the opportunity to sing a solo, wonderful though the ministry in song of Christian vocal artists may be.

In my view, the most appropriate way of implementing Paul’s recommendation within the context of modern worship is to give opportunity for people to choose a hymn for everyone to sing, or, in a time of open worship, to spontaneously start singing a well-known hymn or chorus for everyone to join in.

I realise that this may not easily fit in with modern styles of worship where the pursuit of excellence in performance is paramount, but I know from experience what a blessing it can be when someone in the congregation spontaneously has a song in one of the ways I have just suggested.

Finally, with reference to the songs we sing, may I make two pleas to Christian song writers? First, with regard to the tunes, would you please compose tunes that are quickly learned, easily remembered, and easily sung by members of the congregation who don’t have your musical expertise?

And secondly, please remember that the words of a song are more important than the music. Music is valuable, not only because it helps us express our emotion and lifts our spirit, but also because it helps us remember what we sing. So it’s important that our words clearly express in easily understood English the great truths of our faith. Your songs have the potential to be remembered far more than my sermons! So please make sure you’ve got your theology right, and, if you’re not sure, get someone else to check it for you.

Finally, we need to consider the only other reference to singing in 1 Corinthians 14, where in verse 15, talking about singing in tongues, Paul says:

I will sing with my spirit (in tongues), but I will also sing with my mind (in a language I understand).

However, as we have already seen, this is part of what Paul is recommending for the use of tongues in private, which raises the question as to whether singing in tongues is appropriate in public. There may be a reference to this in Ephesians 5:19 where Paul mentions spiritual songs along with psalms and hymns. KJV is more literal than NIV when it translates this as

speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord…

We know from 1 Corinthians 14 that speaking in tongues is one way of speaking to ourselves and to God (28) and that in doing so we are praying or singing with our spirit (14-15). However, it’s unclear whether, in Ephesians 5:19, Paul is envisaging a public or private situation. The reference to heart rather than hearts might suggest that he is speaking to them as individuals, whereas speaking to yourselves (plural) could be taken to refer to when they are gathered in worship.

Perhaps he intends both. At Pentecost the disciples were filled with the Spirit both collectively and individually and we need, both as a church and as individuals within it, to keep on being filled with the Spirit. If I can sing in tongues privately to maintain the fulness of the Spirit, cannot the church do so collectively? I confess that I was once rather concerned about this, especially when unbelievers were present, on the basis of what Paul says about them thinking we are mad (14:23). But the following episode made me think again.

During part of the time when I was Principal of Mattersey Hall Bible College, the college chapel was across the road from the main part of our campus, and the students’ worship could easily be heard by anyone passing by. There would often be times when everyone was spontaneously singing in tongues to worship the Lord, and I wondered what the local residents might think of it.

But I was greatly reassured when I heard that one of them had asked:

What is that beautiful singing I sometimes hear when I walk past your chapel? It’s so unusual, and it gives me a great sense of peace.

The Corinthians were undoubtedly out of order in the way they were exercising the gift of tongues and clearly needed the strong warning that Paul gave them. But perhaps today he might be encouraging some churches at least to move in the opposite direction and be less concerned about what outsiders might think. As at Pentecost, there will always be those who criticise the moving of the Spirit, but if we are able to give an explanation of what’s happening, as Peter did, there may well be more who are persuaded by our message than those who oppose it.

The doctrinal dimension

The Greek word translated in NIV as a word of instruction is didache, which literally means teaching. It can also mean doctrine (which comes from a Latin verb meaning teach). Paul says relatively little about this in 1 Corinthians 14, but in verse 19 he stresses the importance of teaching when he says:

But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue,

and in verse 31 when he says:

For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged.

And of course, as we mentioned in the Introduction, most of the contents of Paul’s letters were written to instruct the churches in the truth and to expose false doctrine. As I have said elsewhere,

What we believe is of vital importance. The scriptures were written that we might know the truth, and that the truth might set us free (John 8:32). Every genuine experience of the Spirit finds its foundation in the truth of God’s word. The Bible is the inspired word of God. It teaches the truth – about God, about man, about life and death, good and evil, heaven and hell. If we want to know the truth about any of the important questions of life, we will find it in the Bible [1].

John tells us that

Anyone who… does not continue in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son (2 John 9).

Jesus himself told his disciples to beware of the teachings of the Pharisees (Matthew 16:12) and said that their teachings were just rules made by men (Matthew 15:9), and Paul warns us of the same danger in Colossians 2:22. But what a wonderful contrast is the teaching of God our Saviour (Titus 2:10) which is to be recognised by a right attitude to Christ (2 John 7-10) and a right attitude to scripture (2 Timothy 3:16).

We need to know what we believe and why we believe it so that we can by sound doctrine convince those who contradict us (Titus 1:9). It is by knowing the truth that people are set free (John 8:32). That’s why Paul told Timothy:

Devote yourself to… teaching. Watch your life and doctrine closely; persevere in them; because if you do you will save both yourself and your hearers (1 Timothy 4:13, 16).

The sound exposition of the Scriptures is essential whenever we come together.

Edification

We said at the beginning of the talk that the three key principles underlying 14:26 are participation, variety, and edification. Now that we have discussed the first two of these, we turn to the subject of edification, which, without doubt is the major theme of the whole chapter. If love is the dominant theme of chapter 13, in chapter 14 edification is the way that love is expressed in the context of the gathered church. That’s why Paul says everything must be done for the strengthening of the church.

We have already looked at Paul’s specific teaching in chapter 14 in some detail, but now it will be helpful to consider the key principles that underly that teaching and see if they can be applied more widely than the specific issues Paul was addressing in Corinth. As we do so, we will discover five principles that need to be applied if our meetings are to be edifying.

Putting other people first

This is the principle underlying Paul’s teaching in verses 1-5. There he is saying that in church prophecy is more valuable than tongues because when you speak in tongues you edify only yourself, but if you prophesy you will edify others. He picks up the same theme in verse 17:

You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified.

The principle underlying this teaching is putting others first. And that principle can be applied far more widely than the issue of speaking in tongues. It’s good that I have the freedom to stand and worship the Lord while others are sitting down, but if by standing I prevent the person behind me from singing because they cannot see the words on the screen in front, I may be giving thanks well, but the other person is not edified. People need to be taught to be considerate to others in the way they worship the Lord.

Intelligibility

Another of the ways we can build up our fellow Christians is by making sure they can understand. In verse 9 Paul says:

Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying?

Of course, he talking about the futility of speaking in tongues in church unless it’s interpreted. It’s pointless unless people can understand it. But that’s true of everything we do in church. Not everything we say in English is easy to understand – but it should be! This applies to our preaching, our prayers, the songs we sing, our praise and worship – everything. In verse 16 it’s clear that Paul expects that everyone present should be able to say Amen to whatever we say, but to do that they must first understand it,

…how can one who… does not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?

Again, in the context, he’s talking about speaking in tongues, but the underlying principle of intelligibility has a wider application. For example, how can I say Amen to someone’s prayer or praise if I can’t make out what they’re saying because the people around me are making too much noise, or if the background music is too loud? Which, incidentally, it often is. Saying Amen means expressing your agreement with what’s been said, and you can’t do that if you haven’t heard it properly.

Responsibility

As we saw in the last talk when discussing prophets and prophecy, Paul says that

The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets (32).

This implies that both prophets and those who have the gift of prophecy are responsible for how they use their gifts. But the need to take responsibility for our actions goes far wider than the gift of prophecy. If God has entrusted us with any spiritual gift, we are responsible for how we use it.

For example, the Holy Spirit does not force us to speak in tongues. He enables us to do so. We are responsible for when, how often, and how loudly. This principle applies to everything we do in church. We are to follow the teaching of Scripture and of our leaders (37-38) and we cannot make the excuse, I couldn’t help it. The Holy Spirit made me do it. And, as we have already said, the very fact that Paul gave us instructions on how these gifts should be used implies that we are responsible for how we use them.

Order

Paul says that God is not a God of disorder but of peace (33), and it’s our responsibility to see that everything is done in a fitting and orderly way (40). In the context this meant ensuring that speaking in tongues should be done one at a time and that only one person should interpret each utterance (27). And the same principle applied to the use of prophecy (30).

Paul’s specific teaching on this is still applicable today, but the wider principle holds good for everything we do. Everything should done in a fitting and orderly way. Interpretation of what is fitting and orderly will possibly vary from church to church, and there will undoubtedly be cultural variations, but the leaders of each church should be able to agree on what is appropriate in their situation, bearing in mind the overall principles taught in Scripture.

Balance

Finally, it’s clear from Paul’s teaching that there needs to be a measure of balance in our meetings. In Corinth there was too much speaking in tongues. In another church it might be too much music, or even too much teaching! If there is to be the variety of which Paul speaks in verse 26, and if each member is to have the opportunity to contribute, church leaders need to ensure that there is a healthy balance in each meeting.

But that is not to say that there cannot be special occasions when an entire meeting is given over to teaching, or to prayer, or to worship, for example. Such occasions are not to be confused with the regular meetings of the church, where preserving a measure of balance will be essential to the edification of all God’s people.

So, to summarise, in this talk we have examined the three principles underlying Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 14:26 – participation, variety, and edification. We noted that our meetings should include the supernatural, the musical and the doctrinal. But, most important of all, we saw that everything should be done for the edification of the church, and that this will be achieved by putting others first, making sure that what is said is intelligible, taking responsibility for our actions, and by preserving order and balance in our meetings. These principles have a wider application than the specific areas that Paul was addressing in the Corinthian church. Exactly how they should be applied is for each local church leadership to decide. And that is something we will be discussing in our next and final talk.

[1] Introduction to You’d Better Believe it. This book contains teaching on the basic doctrines of the Christian faith and is available from www.davidpetts.org.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 10. Paul’s Teaching on Prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14

Having discussed Paul’s teaching on tongues and interpretation in 1 Corinthians 14, we now turn to the subject of prophecy. We will consider what it is, its value and purpose, its limitations, and its use in church.

What is prophecy?

In both Old and New Testaments the basic meaning of the word prophesy is to speak on behalf of someone else. A good illustration of this can be found in Exodus 7: 1-2 where the Lord says to Moses :

See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet . You are to say everything I command you, and your brother Aaron is to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go…

Aaron is called Moses ’ prophet because he is going to speak on his behalf. Understood this way, to prophesy is to hear from God and then pass on to others what he has said [1].

Today, however, prophecy is often used to mean foretelling the future, but although it can contain an element of prediction, this is not its essential meaning. And it should not be confused with preaching or teaching. In Body Builders I described the gift of prophecy as:

speaking on behalf of God by the supernatural inspiration of the Holy Spirit for the strengthening, encouragement and comfort of the church . It may at times contain elements of revelation or even prediction , but must be distinguished from the ministry of the teacher whose message comes from God by way of the Scriptures.

In the New Testament, apart from the many references back to the prophecies contained in the Old Testament, we find that there are three different ways in which the words prophecy and prophesy are used.

First, remembering that the basic meaning of prophesy is to speak on behalf of someone, as God’s people there’s a sense in which we can all ‘prophesy’ because we are all called to speak on his behalf. The purpose of the Spirit’s coming at Pentecost was that we might receive power to be witnesses (Acts 1:8). The Spirit was poured out so that all God’s people could prophesy – sons and daughters, young and old, servants, men and women (Acts 2:16-18).

Secondly, however, although we are speaking for God when we witness for Jesus, it is not the same as the gift of prophecy that brings strengthening, encouragement and comfort to the church (14:3). In 12:8-11, where Paul lists nine spiritual gifts , one of which is prophecy , he says:

…to another prophecy … he (the Spirit ) gives them to each person just as he determines.

This shows that this gift is not given to everybody, and Romans 12:6 backs this up by saying:

We have different gifts according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying…

So, although all Christians are to ‘prophesy ’ in the general sense of speaking on God’s behalf, not all will exercise the gift of prophecy Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians.

And, thirdly, not all who exercise the gift of prophecy will be prophets in the Ephesians 4:11 sense. In Body Builders I have suggested that the clearest role of a New Testament [2] prophet is to be seen in the ministry of Agabus who spoke with great revelation from the Spirit (Acts 11:27-28, 21:10). This included the accurate prediction of certain future events. His prophecy about a widespread famine (Acts 11:27-30) and his prediction of Paul 's captivity in Jerusalem (Acts 21:11) are well-known examples of this. They demonstrate that his ministry involved more than the simple gift of prophecy. In short:

· All God’s people should prophesy (speak on his behalf).

· Not all will receive the gift of prophecy (to edify the church ).

· Not all of these will exercise the ministry of a prophet like Agabus .

With these things in mind, as we now turn to 1 Corinthians 14, it should be clear that it’s the gift of prophecy and possibly the ministry of prophets that Paul is talking about.

The value and purpose of prophecy

Returning now to 1 Corinthians 14, as we read verse 1 it becomes immediately clear that Paul valued prophecy very highly indeed. He says that we should eagerly desire it:

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.

This is the main theme of the chapter. He ends the chapter as he has started it:

Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy…(39).

The Greek word Paul uses for eagerly desire is very strong. It’s the origin of our English word zeal. God wants us to be passionate about prophecy. Notice that in verse 1 Paul doesn’t say or. He says and.

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts.

The pursuit of spiritual gifts is not an optional extra. We must not say, I have love, so I don’t need spiritual gifts. We must eagerly desire spiritual gifts, and especially the gift of prophecy (1). But why?

The value of the gift is to be seen in its purpose. We should be passionate about prophecy because it edifies the church. Paul says in verses 4 and 5:

… he who prophesies edifies the church. I would rather have you prophesy… so that the church may be edified.

What he means by this is explained in verse 3 where he says:

But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort.

In the context of church worship this is the practical outworking of Paul’s teaching about love in chapter 13. We are to love our fellow Christians, and if we love them we will want to be a blessing to them, to strengthen, encourage, and comfort them. And that’s what prophecy does.

But that’s not all. Prophecy can also have a powerful effect on unbelievers who may come into the church. In Talk 8 we discussed some of the difficulties in understanding verses 22-23, but verses 24-25 are very clear:

But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all,

25 and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

So prophecy is to be valued very highly, not only because it strengthens, encourages, and comforts believers, but also because of the powerful effect it can have on people who do not yet believe. But having said that, prophecy is not without its limitations. In 13:9-10 Paul says:

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.

This is because at present our knowledge is incomplete. We see but a poor reflection as in a mirror (12). Our prophecies are imperfect because they are our prophecies, and we are not perfect yet. That’s why in 14:12 Paul tells us to try to excel in it. If our use of God’s precious gifts were perfect, we would not need to try to excel in them – in fact all Paul’s instructions about their use would have been unnecessary! And that’s why we’re told in 14:29 that we should weigh carefully what is said. But that brings us to how prophecy should be used in church.

The use of prophecy in church

Perhaps the first thing to say about the use of prophecy in church is that we should always bear in mind its purpose, which is to strengthen, encourage, comfort, and edify God’s people (3-4). There is no suggestion that it should be used to rebuke them, or even to give them guidance.

Paul tells us in Romans 8:14 that it’s our privilege as God’s children to be personally led by the Spirit . Guidance received through prophecy should simply serve as confirmation of something that God has already spoken to us about in our hearts. A good example of this is found in Acts 13:1-3 where the prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch were told by the Holy Spirit to set Barnabas and Paul apart for the work to which he had already called them [3].

So, bearing in mind the purpose for which the gift of prophecy is given, we are now in a position to consider Paul’s specific teaching on the use of the gift in church. This is found in verses 29-32 where he says:

Two or three prophets should speak (29)

Note the contrast with verse 27. Paul does not say if with regard to prophecy. It is not merely to be permitted but to be encouraged. The prophets should speak. But how is Paul using the word prophet here? Is he talking about prophets like Agabus, the kind of ministry he refers to in Ephesians 4:11, or does he mean those who exercise the simple gift of prophecy?

Some have suggested that two or three prophets should speak in verse 29 refers to those with the ministry of a prophet (as in Ephesians 4:11), but that when Paul says in verse 31 you can all prophesy he is referring to the whole church. However, the use of the word for in verse 31 clearly identifies the people he is speaking to as the prophets he addresses in verses 29-30. This means that verses 29-31 must all refer to the same people, either those who are prophets, or those who have the gift of prophecy, or even to both.

In my view we cannot say with certainty which group Paul is addressing in these verses, it is very clear that the principles he is teaching apply to both. The first of these is that although prophecy is to be encouraged its use is to be limited and it needs to be judged or weighed carefully.

The others should weigh carefully what is said (29)

The verb translated weigh carefully is the same as is used for distinguishing between spirits in 12:10. The clear implication is that every prophecy needs to be evaluated, and this illustrates the point that we made earlier that it is by no means infallible. However, despite its limitations, Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5:19-20 that it’s not to be despised. But even that may indicate the possibility of human weakness in the operation of the gift, for why else would the Thessalonians have been despising it?

So prophecy needs to be judged or weighed carefully. But this raises two questions. The first is: Who is responsible for judging it? Looking at the immediate context, Paul seems to mean the other prophets. The things of the Spirit are spiritually discerned (2:14), and those with a prophetic gift are more likely to accurately weigh a prophetic revelation.

But surely the others may be applied more widely than that? As we have seen, there is a sense in which all God’s people are prophets, and we all have the capacity, and the responsibility, to weigh prophetic words. And certainly those who are pastors or teachers have a special responsibility to be alert for anything that might mislead the flock.

Secondly, we need to consider the question: How is prophecy to be judged? There are two areas of importance here, its authenticity and its application. By authenticity I mean its conformity to Scripture. Paul is very clear in verse 37 that what (he is) writing… is the Lord's command. All prophecy must be judged in the light of what the Spirit has already said in the Bible.

By application I mean that we need to consider to whom the prophecy may apply. Is it for me? Is it for the whole church? How do we apply it in practice? These are decisions that we all must make after hearing a prophecy. Clearly, we cannot judge it until we have heard it! However, in some churches people who feel they have a prophetic word to bring are expected to share it with the church leadership before bringing it publicly. The church leaders evaluate it before it is given. The advantages of this are twofold:

· It prevents any unauthentic or inappropriate prophecy being given in public.

· Those who are inexperienced, but eager to prophesy, feel more secure in having their prophecy confirmed by the leaders before bringing it.

However, it’s surely unthinkable that those with a proven track record in prophecy should have to consult the church leaders before they prophesy. Their prophecies should be judged after they have delivered them, which is almost certainly what Paul intended. Furthermore, the insistence that leaders must be consulted before prophecies are given seems out of keeping with the encouragement Paul gives in verse 26 for all to participate, and with the spontaneity implicit in his teaching on the matter in verse 30.

And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop (30)

This not only shows the spontaneity that Paul envisages; it also shows that, although the purpose of prophecy is mainly the strengthening, encouragement, and comfort of the church, it may also contain an element of revelation. It also seems to suggest that it was the custom to stand when prophesying while others were seated. Perhaps the second person would stand to indicate that they had received a revelation from the Spirit and that is how the first person would know it was time to stop. Be that as it may, the important point here is that each prophet must be prepared to make room for others who exercise the gift.

For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged (31)

What does Paul mean when he says, You can all prophesy? In my view this cannot possibly refer to all the congregation, as this would contradict the principle taught in chapter 12 that the gifts are distributed as the Spirit determines and would be out of harmony with the phrase to another prophecy (12:10).

Taken in context he must surely mean that all the prophets, or all those with the gift of prophecy, may prophesy. Each person must be given opportunity to exercise their gift as the Spirit may lead, but presumably not in contravention of the two or three principle of verse 29.

The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets (32)

It seems likely that by spirits here Paul is referring to their spiritual gift. While the Greek word pneuma normally means spirit, Paul does use it in 14:12 to refer to spiritual gifts, when he says, Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel… Understood this way, verse 32 means that the spiritual gift of prophecy is under the control of the person who exercises it.

Indeed, all the gifts that God gives us are under our control. This is clear from the fact that specific instructions are given for their use. If the use of the gifts were only dependent upon the Holy Spirit himself such instructions would be both inappropriate and unnecessary. And because of our responsibility for the control of the gift God has given us, as we have already seen, Paul teaches that we are able to:

· regulate the number of prophetic utterances in any one meeting (14:29).

· cease prophesying if something is revealed to someone else (14:30).

· prophesy rather than speak in tongues if unbelievers are present (14:23-25).

Our ability to control the gift of prophecy also implies that we are responsible for the terminology in which we express the message that God has given us. Since we are not infallible, we would be wise to phrase our prophecies in the third person rather than the first, to talk of God as he and not I. For example, it would be better to say

The Lord loves you...

than to say, ‘

I love you, says the Lord.

We may believe that God has given us something to say, but we are not God, and we should not talk as if we were!

But that now brings us to the final verses of 1 Corinthians 14. As our subject in this talk has been Paul’s teaching on the gift of prophecy, we will confine our attention to those verses that are directly relevant to this subject. Verses 34-35 in the NIV read as follows:

34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

It is clear that in the context silence is relative and not absolute. The exhortation relates to asking their husbands questions at home (35) and not to worship or exercising spiritual gifts such as prophecy. In fact we read in 11:5 that Paul permitted women to both pray and prophesy in church, and although it’s possible to pray silently, it’s certainly not possible to prophesy silently!

37 If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. 38 If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored. 39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

As he draws to his conclusion Paul summarises his teaching on public worship in a few short verses. Whatever your spiritual gift may be you must submit to the authority of the apostle’s commands (37). This has obvious implications with regard to the authority of Scripture, but also to the authority of ministry gift over spiritual gifts. Prophecy is to be encouraged and tongues should not be forbidden (39). Whatever happens, everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

Next time, we’ll be looking at the key principles that underlie Paul’s teaching in this chapter with a view to indicating how church leaders might seek to implement them in their churches.

[1] For a more detailed study of this, see the chapters on Prophets and The Gift of Prophecy in Body Builders – Gifts to make God’s people grow.

[2] Old Testament prophets do not serve well as an illustration of the role of prophets today. Before Pentecost only a few people experienced the Spirit. Since Pentecost the gift of the Spirit has been available to all (Acts 2:17). It’s the privilege of all God’s children to be led by his Spirit (Romans 8:14). The role of prophets since Pentecost, therefore, differs considerably from that of Old Testament prophets. See Body Builders for further clarification.

[3] See also Paul's attitude to the prophecy of the prophet Agabus in Acts 21:1-15. Agabus predicts what will happen to Paul, but he does not tell him what to do.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 9 Paul’s Teaching on Interpretation of Tongues

The gift of interpretation of tongues is a gift imparted by the Holy Spirit that enables Christians to understand what is said when someone speaks in tongues. It is given to individual Christians, as determined by the Holy Spirit, with the specific purpose of edifying the church.

Paul’s entire teaching on this gift is found in 1 Corinthians, chapters 12 and 14. In chapter 12 it is mentioned twice, first in verse 10 where it is mentioned among the list of supernatural gifts given to individual Christians as the Holy Spirit determines, and then in verse 30 where Paul asks the rhetorical question, Do all interpret? clearly implying that all do not. This means that apart from Paul’s overall teaching on supernatural gifts, some of which we have outlined in Talk 2, our main source of material for understanding this gift is found in 1 Corinthians 14. In this talk I will:

· Examine the references to interpretation of tongues

· Discuss certain practical issues that arise from this

· Share a personal testimony.

References to interpretation in 1 Corinthians 14

These are found in verses 5, 13, and 26-28. We will examine each of these in turn.

Verse 5

The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless they interpret so that the church may be edified.

This verse makes clear the purpose of the gift – the edification of the church. We have already seen that in verses 1-5 Paul is arguing that prophecy is preferable to tongues because prophecy edifies the church whereas speaking in tongues does not, because no one can understand it (2).

Here, however, he acknowledges that if speaking in tongues is interpreted it can edify the church, in which case it is as valuable as prophecy. But this need not mean that it’s necessarily the same as prophecy. We will discuss this later when we consider the form the gift should take.

Verse 13

In verse 12 Paul underlines his teaching that the main purpose of spiritual gifts is to build up the church by telling the Corinthians to try to excel in gifts that build up the church. This gives the reason for what he says in verse 13.

Anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say.

He says this because the only way that speaking in tongues will edify other Christians is if it is interpreted. This does not mean, however, that all interpretation should be given by the person who has spoken in tongues. Far from it. The interpretation may very well be given by someone else. And to allow someone other than the speaker in tongues to interpret means that more people are participating in the meeting, something Paul is keen to encourage, as the next passage makes clear.

Verses 26-28

26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two – or at the most three – should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

Verse 26 is the key verse upon which this series is based. It gives clear guidance on the sort of things we should expect in our meetings, and it’s noteworthy that tongues and interpretation are included in what Paul is recommending. But note the use of the word if in verse 27:

If anyone speaks in a tongue…

This shows us that Paul does not automatically assume that there will be speaking in tongues in the meeting. The things mentioned in verse 26 are not obligatory ingredients for every meeting. They are the kind of things to expect, but not necessarily in every meeting. The manifestation of spiritual gifts will vary from meeting to meeting as the Spirit leads. The main point is that whatever is taking place, everything must be done for the strengthening of the church.

So, if anyone speaks in tongues, what should happen next? Paul is quite clear on this as the following literal translation shows:

If anyone speaks in a tongue, let it be by two or at the most three people. And let one person interpret (my translation).

At first sight the first part of the verse is reasonably clear. Paul seems to be saying that during the course of a meeting, no more than three people should speak in tongues. But this clearly applies to the use of tongues for the purpose of interpretation, because he says, Let one person interpret. However, he does allow for the private use of tongues in church, provided that this is done quietly, speaking to oneself and to God (28) and this need not be limited to three people because it is done privately.

Furthermore, even with regard to the use of tongues for interpretation, bearing in mind the flexibility of starting and finishing times that would have been current in Corinth, it’s possible that Paul meant no more than two or three people should speak in tongues before moving on to other things. We will consider this further when we discuss practical issues that arise from Paul’s teaching.

Another practical issue that we will need to consider in due course is how to understand and apply the final part of verse 27, which NIV translates as, Someone must interpret, but which KJV translates this as,

Let one interpret (my emphasis),

which is the literal translation of the Greek word that Paul uses here. The word is heis and students of Greek will know that this is used for the numeral 1. (The Greek for 1, 2, 3, is heis, duo, treis). It occurs 20 times in 1 Corinthians and everywhere else it can only mean one. That’s why, in the translation I offered earlier I translated it as

Let one person interpret.

But does this mean that Paul is saying that if there are two or three utterances in tongues, the same person should give the interpretation for all of them, as some have suggested? I think not, and I will give my reasons for saying so later.

Finally, we have already commented on verse 28 in the last talk with regard to speaking in tongues, but Paul’s use of the word interpreter is interesting. He says:

If there is no interpreter, the speaker (in tongues) should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

The term interpreter clearly indicates that those who exercised the gift of interpretation were seen as permanently possessing the gift. If that were not so, how could the speaker in tongues know whether there was an interpreter present or not? Supernatural gifts are not something which God gives and then takes away. They are given to individual Christians (12:8-11) for the benefit of the church. A person who has interpreted once can be expected to do so again. Obviously this places a heavy responsibility on the interpreter, as I know from my own experience, which I will share I the last part of this talk.

Practical issues arising from Paul’s teaching

The form the gift should take

We saw in the last talk that Paul describes speaking in tongues as speaking with our spirit as distinct from speaking with our mind (14:14). This may take any one of several different forms – prayer, praise, thanksgiving, and speaking mysteries, which, we said, could well be connected with declaring the wonders of God revealed in the truths of the gospel. Now, if the gift of interpretation enables us to understand what is being said when someone speaks in tongues, it follows that the interpretation should take the same form as the tongue, whether prayer, or praise, or thanksgiving etc.

It’s my view that interpretation can take any of these forms and it would be wrong to limit its expression to just one of them. However, in some churches interpretation almost always takes the form of a prophecy and in others it tends to take the form of praise. Those who take the view that interpretation should take the form of a prophecy base their argument on 14:5 where Paul says:

The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless they interpret so that the church may be edified.

The argument goes like this. Prophecy edifies the church. Interpretation edifies the church. Therefore, the interpretation of tongues equals prophecy. But there is a logical flaw in this argument. It’s like saying,

Tea is a drink. Coffee is a drink.

Therefore, tea is the same as coffee!

Paul says that both prophecy and interpretation edify the church, but that does not necessarily mean that they do so in the same way. If, for example, interpretation were to take the form of praise, rather than prophecy, would it not edify the church? And who is not edified by the psalms of praise? I have personally been greatly edified by both forms of interpretation.

Those who insist on praise interpretations base their argument on the NIV translation of 14:2, which reads:

For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him…

So, it is argued, if the tongue is to God, the interpretation must be to God, in the form of either praise or prayer. However, as I explained in the last talk, a more literal translation would be:

For the person speaking in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him, but he is speaking mysteries with his spirit (my translation).

This makes clear that the reason for saying that speaking in tongues is to God is that no one can understand it. When the disciples spoke in tongues at Pentecost, did it not speak to men? And why was this? Because they understood what was being said. It follows, therefore, that if tongues in church can be understood through the use of the gift of interpretation, it can most certainly speak to us.

I have said more on this in the chapter on interpretation of tongues in Body Builders, but I hope that I have said enough here to show that both praise and prophecy style interpretations are legitimate manifestations of the gift and we should accept and encourage both.

Two or at the most three…

I suggested earlier that, bearing in mind the flexibility of starting and finishing times that would have been current in Corinth, Paul may have meant that no more than two or three people should speak in tongues before moving on to other aspects of worship. However, I am not convinced that this would be helpful for most of our meetings today, but during protracted meetings like days or nights of prayer it would make room for further expressions of the gift. For meetings of normal length, it would, in my view, be wise to apply quite strictly the limitations Paul imposes in this verse. But that raises the question, What should we do if someone brings a fourth utterance in tongues? Should it be interpreted?

The first thing to say in response to this is that it’s unlikely to happen if the church has been taught how spiritual gifts should be operated in our meetings. However, on the rare occasion when it might happen, my own view is that it should be interpreted on the grounds that the overriding principle in Paul’s teaching in this chapter is edification, and interpreted tongues are more edifying than tongues that are not interpreted.

However, to avoid repetition of this, I would gently point out to the congregation that the scriptural limit is two, or at the most three. But this is something about which the leaders of the church should decide in advance their interpretation of Paul’s teaching and how it should be applied locally.

Let one person interpret

I said earlier that the Greek in verse 27 is best translated as, Let one person interpret. This in fact reflects how the Authorised Version translates it and, as a result of this, some churches have taught that, if there are two or three utterances in tongues, the same person should give the interpretation for all of them.

However, although this is a valid application of what Paul is saying, I think it more likely that his intention is to say that each utterance in tongues needs only one person to interpret it – an instruction that may well have been needful for the unruly members of the Corinthian church.

A personal testimony

I said earlier, when talking about Paul’s use of the word interpreter (28), that a person who has interpreted once can be expected to do so again. Paul’s teaching implies that, if we want to speak in tongues publicly, we need to check that there’s an interpreter present. And if there is, we are free to go ahead. That places a heavy responsibility on the interpreter to be ready to interpret at any time, because we do not know when someone is going to speak in tongues..

I confess that I have sometimes found this difficult and am often tempted to doubt, wondering how I can be sure that any interpretation I might bring will be correct. But I have also discovered that, as we overcome our doubts by trusting the Lord, he does not let us down, as the testimony I’m about to share confirms.

I first started interpreting tongues as a student at Oxford, shortly after I was baptised in the Holy Spirit. The Pentecostal church I was attending in Oxford was a good church and the gifts of the Spirit were in evidence during most Sunday morning services. However, there were one or two occasions when speaking in tongues was not interpreted, and I was quite concerned because I knew that this was not in line with Scripture.

I shared my concern with a friend who was an evangelist and he said that the solution was simple. I should interpret it. But the problem was that I didn’t have the gift of interpretation. To which he replied, Then ask for it. As I knew that this was in line with 1 Corinthians 14:13, I began to pray that God would give me the gift, and a few weeks later the opportunity came. Someone spoke in tongues, and I was expecting, and hoping, that someone else would interpret it! But when no one else did so, I began to speak out in faith, believing that God would not let me down, yet wondering all the time if I was saying the right thing!

For months I wondered if the gift I had received was genuine, or whether it was ‘just me’. Then, one day, at the close of a meeting in which I had interpreted, someone came up to me and told me that they had received word for word the interpretation which I had given. I had exercised the gift in faith for months, but finally I had God's confirmation that it was real. Similar confirmation has come dozens of times since. The following testimony is the most outstanding example.

In November 1977 I was serving as Acting Principal of Mattersey Hall Bible College prior to becoming Principal in 1978. One Saturday evening we took a bus-load of about 45 students to Bethshan Tabernacle in Manchester. There were several hundred people in the meeting during which the students sang and testified, and I preached. As soon as I had finished preaching , a woman near to the back of the meeting began to speak in tongues . As I was still at the microphone, it seemed appropriate for me to interpret so that everyone present would hear and be edified. As usual I spoke out in faith what I felt the Lord had put on my heart. When I had finished, we sang a hymn and the pastor closed the meeting in prayer .

As soon as the meeting was over, one of our students, Guetawende Roamba from Burkina Faso rushed up to me. He was clearly very excited, and when I asked him what was the matter, he told me that the woman who had spoken in tongues had been speaking his native language. Now in Burkina Faso they speak French, and because I also speak French fairly fluently, I knew that she had not been speaking French. So I wondered what language it might be.

‘What language?’ I asked. Moré, he replied. Frankly, at that time I had never heard of it – and we found out later that the Irish lady who had spoken in tongues had never heard of it either! But I was excited that I had been present when speaking in tongues had been recognised as a real language.

At the same time I was not a little concerned because I was the one who had given the interpretation! I had been interpreting tongues since I was a student at Oxford in 1960, but it had always been (as it always must be) ‘by faith ’. I had simply trusted the promise of Jesus that God gives good gifts to those who ask him (Matthew 7:11). Of course, I had no need to fear, but it’s easy to imagine how embarrassed I would have been if I had ‘got it wrong’ in the presence of one of my Bible College students!

I hardly dared ask the question, but I knew I had to.

And what about the interpretation, Gueta? Was it accurate?

Of course, you know the answer, because I wouldn’t be telling this story if the interpretation had been wrong!

What an amazing thing! The Holy Spirit inspired an Irish woman to speak an African language which she had never heard, or even heard of, and then gave the interpretation to an English man who had never heard of it either! God is faithful. His word is true. And his Spirit is still at work distributing his gifts as he himself determines.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 8 Paul’s Teaching on Tongues in 1 Corinthians 14

So far in this series we have suggested that 1 Corinthians 14:26 should be taken as a serious indication of what God desires when we meet for worship, and we have been looking at chapters 12 and 13 to see how they might influence our understanding of this verse.

In chapter 13 Paul has demonstrated the futility of spiritual gifts unless they are exercised in love. He now goes on to give practical instructions concerning the use of the gifts in public worship. The underlying theme of the chapter is edification, which must be the basic motive for the exercise of spiritual gifts. Prophecy is seen as the most appropriate means of edifying both believers and unbelievers. The New Testament believers’ meeting was a time when all should participate with a view to edifying the church (26).

In this talk we’ll be considering what Paul teaches in chapter 14 about speaking in tongues. In following talks we’ll consider what he says about interpretation of tongues and prophecy, as they are all mentioned in verse 26 and much of the rest of the chapter is taken up with these themes. As we do so, we will discover what Paul has to say about the value, purpose, and use of these gifts.

In the final talk we’ll be looking at some of the key principles which underlie his teaching, such as edification and the need for intelligibility, variety, order, and balance in our meetings. Handling things in this way will mean that we will not be moving through chapter 14 verse by verse, as Paul’s teaching on each of these themes is scattered throughout the chapter.

Today we will seek to answer three questions:

· How does Paul describe speaking in tongues?

· What is the purpose of speaking in tongues?

· How is speaking in tongues to be used in church?

How does Paul describe speaking in tongues?

Perhaps the first thing to say is that Paul uses exactly the same Greek expression as is used by Luke when he describes the events that took place at Pentecost. Acts 2:4, when literally translated, reads:

They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in different languages…

I have translated the word for tongues here as languages for two reasons. First, because the context clearly shows that the disciples were speaking the languages of the people in the crowd, and secondly, because tongues is in fact just another rather old-fashioned word for languages. Our English word language is derived from the French word langue which can mean either tongue (the thing in your mouth you speak with) or language (the thing you speak).

The words used by both Luke and Paul are laleo (speak) and glossa (tongue or language). So when Paul talks about speaking in tongues he is referring to the same phenomenon as took place at Pentecost when the disciples spoke languages they had never learned. However, at Pentecost there were people present who recognised the languages the disciples were speaking, whereas usually there is no one present who will recognise the language we are speaking. This is probably why in 1 Corinthians 14:2 Paul says:

For the person speaking in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him, but he is speaking mysteries with his spirit (my translation).

Here Paul tells us that when we speak in tongues we are speaking to God. This is because, unless it’s interpreted, as we shall see later, no one can understand us. We are speaking mysteries with our spirit. Indeed, we ourselves do not understand what we are saying. This is confirmed in verse 14 where Paul says:

…if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

So speaking in tongues is speaking a language we do not understand and which no one else can understand. When we speak in English we are speaking with our mind. We understand what we are saying. But when we speak in tongues we are speaking with our spirit, and we do not understand what we are saying.

In verse 14 Paul has described speaking in tongues as praying with our spirit, but in verse 16 it’s clear that it can also be praising:

If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?

So he also refers to it as thanksgiving and this is repeated in verse 17 when he says:

You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.

This is in harmony with what we read in Acts 2:11 when the bewildered crowd at Pentecost exclaimed:

We hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!

This could either mean that the disciples were praising God in tongues or that they were proclaiming the gospel. The Greek word musterion which Paul uses in verse 2, which tells us that when we speak in tongues we are speaking mysteries, is used elsewhere in Paul’s writings to refer to the gospel as a secret made known by God to man (my italics) through his Spirit (e.g. Ephesians 3:4-5).

So Paul describes speaking in tongues as speaking with our spirit rather than with our mind. He uses verbs like speaking (2), praying (14), praising (16), and giving thanks (17). And, as at Pentecost, it can also be a sign for unbelievers (22). But this is something we will discuss in a moment.

What is the purpose of speaking in tongues?

The apostle Paul valued very highly his ability to speak in tongues. In verse 18 he says:

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.

But in verse 19 he adds:

But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

This makes clear that, although he spoke in tongues a great deal when he was not in church – that is, when he was in private – he did not do so in public. In an earlier talk we have already argued that the distinction between the public and private use of tongues explains what Paul means when he says in 12:30, Do all speak in tongues? All may speak in tongues privately, but not all will do so publicly.

But chapter 14 sheds light on both these uses. The purpose of private tongues is, as we have already seen, that we might speak with our spirit as distinct from speaking with our mind. This may take the form of prayer, or praise, or thanksgiving. Used in this way it is an important means of building ourselves up spiritually, as Paul says in verse 4, He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself.

This is presumably why Paul valued so highly his personal use of tongues, and it may well be what he was referring to when he told Timothy to fan into flame the gift of God that he had received when Paul had laid his hands on him (2 Timothy 1:6-7). Verses 14-15 reveal Paul’s personal determination to do the same:

For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.

He is clearly recommending that we should do the same. And if we really want the Holy Spirit to move powerfully in our meetings, we will be willing to make time in private to pray, not only in English with our mind, but also in tongues with our spirit.

Now with regard to the purpose of the public use of tongues, we have already mentioned the day of Pentecost, where the miracle of unlearned Galileans speaking languages they had never learned led to the conversion of some 3000 people. But his was clearly not the scenario Paul had in mind when he said to the Corinthians that tongues are a sign for unbelievers (14:22).

It’s clear from the next verse that, far from expecting unbelievers to come to faith when hearing speaking in tongues, he thinks it more likely that they will conclude that the Corinthians are out of their mind! So in what sense are tongues intended as a sign to those who do not believe? As we examine the passage in which he says this we find what at first sight appear to be two contradictions, one with regard to speaking in tongues and the other regarding prophecy:

· Regarding tongues, in verse 22 Paul says that they are a sign for unbelievers, but in verse 23 he implies that it’s not good to speak in tongues in their presence in case they think you’re out of your mind.

· Regarding prophecy, in verse 22 he says that it’s not for unbelievers, but for believers. However, in verses 24 and 25 he says that if unbelievers come into a meeting where everyone is prophesying, they will be convinced that they are sinners and fall down and worship God.

So how do we explain these apparent contradictions? Paul’s instructions are fairly clear. He is continuing the theme he started at the beginning of the chapter that prophecy is preferable to tongues. It is more helpful to believers and now, he says, it is more helpful to unbelievers too. So if unbelievers come in, it’s better to prophesy than to speak in tongues.

But the argument he uses to back up this teaching is extremely difficult to follow. However, one possible way of resolving the difficulty is to begin by taking the reference to prophecy in verse 22 as referring, not to the gift of prophecy, but to the prophecy of from Isaiah 28:11-12 that he has just quoted. Abstract nouns like prophecy usually take the definite article in Greek, whereas in English we leave it out. So he propheteia can be either translated prophecy or the prophecy. In Matthew 13:14-15, for example, he propheteia is used to refer to a specific quotation from the prophecy of Isaiah. It is possible that Paul is doing the same here.

Taken this way, verses 21-24 could be paraphrased as follows:

21 In the law it has been written that I will speak to this people in other tongues (even though they are an unbelieving people, as the context of Isaiah 28:11 makes clear) and yet they will not listen to me, says the Lord (Isaiah 28:12).

22 So, on the basis of the quote from Isaiah, tongues were and are given as a sign to unbelieving people. However, the prophecy (Isaiah 28:11-12) is not given for the benefit of the unbelievers but for us believers in order the we might act upon it in the following way:

23 (Because Isaiah’s prophecy was written for us believers telling us that the unbeliever would not hear even the sign of tongues), when we gather together in worship we shouldn't speak in tongues when unbelievers are present, because it's a sign they will reject (and will only lead to their condemnation).

24 On the other hand, if we all prophesy the unbeliever will be convinced…

Although we cannot be sure that I am right in understanding the passage in this way, this suggestion does overcome a notorious difficulty for which, in my view, no satisfactory explanation has been offered so far. But, even if it’s correct, we still have the difficulty that Paul’s warning that, if we all speak in tongues unbelievers will say that we are out of our mind, appears to be contradicted by events on the day of Pentecost.

However, we need to remember that in Acts 2, when some 3000 people were added to the church, the first effects of the miracle of tongues were bewilderment (6), amazement and perplexity (12), and, on the part of some, cynicism (13). It was the preaching of the gospel by Peter that led to their conversion. So Paul’s warning that speaking in tongues may lead to opposition, and his insistence that prophecy – speaking words that people can understand – is preferable to tongues, are not out of harmony with Acts 2.

On the basis of all this, it’s better, in my view, to consider the use of tongues as a sign to unbelievers as something exceptional [1]. We rarely, if ever, know that a language we may be speaking in tongues is going to be recognised by someone present and we must trust the Holy Spirit to enable us to speak that language if he so determines. He alone knows what impact it will have on the hearer.

But this is by no means the only way that tongues may be used in public, as Paul makes clear in the opening verses of chapter 14, where he says:

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. 3 But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.

The reference to interpretation of tongues in verse 5 makes clear the purpose of its use. It’s for the edification of the church. Tongues are unintelligible unless they are interpreted and without interpretation the speaker is just speaking into the air (9). But when interpreted they can fulfil a similar function to prophecy, which also edifies the church (4) bringing strengthening, encouragement and comfort (3).

We will return to this in the next talk when we consider Paul’s teaching on the gift of interpretation of tongues, but for now it’s sufficient to note that the purpose of the use of tongues in church must surely be the same as that of the gift of interpretation – namely, the edification, strengthening, encouragement and comfort of believers.

How is speaking in tongues to be used in church?

Despite Paul’s clear teaching that prophecy is preferable to tongues (1-5), he by no means discourages the use of tongues in church. Although in verse 5 he says that he would rather have them prophesy, he does say, nevertheless, I would like every one of you to speak in tongues. And we have already seen that he expects speaking in tongues to be a regular part of the worship of the church (26) and it is certainly not to be forbidden (39).

However, the key to its use in church is that it needs to be interpreted so that everyone may be edified. In fact, in verse 28 he tells us that

If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

This may, of course, be the person who has spoken in tongues, as in verses 12-13 Paul encourages those who speak in tongues to pray for the gift of interpretation:

But if a person who wants to speak in tongues does not possess the gift of interpretation, they must first make sure that someone is present who does, and if not, they must speak quietly to themselves and to God (28).

However, if an interpreter is present, the speaker in tongues may speak out loud with a view to its being interpreted for the edification of the church, subject to the conditions Paul gives in verse 27, where he says:

If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at the most three, should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret.

This instruction is so clear that it hardly requires further comment, but we will discuss some of the practical implications in the final talk in this series.

Conclusion

In this talk we have argued that when Paul uses the term speaking in tongues, he is referring to the same gift as the disciples received on the day of Pentecost – the ability to speak languages they had never learned. We saw that tongues may be expressed in a variety of ways, including, prayer, praise, thanksgiving, and declaring the wonders of God.

We discovered that when we speak in tongues it’s our spirit that is praying, not our mind. God gives us this gift to help us edify ourselves – to build ourselves up spiritually. It is also given so that when it’s interpreted it will edify the church. It can also be used as a sign to unbelievers when, as at Pentecost, they understand the language that is being spoken. Finally, we saw that Paul does expect this gift to be in operation in our meetings, but that it should be used quietly if it is not for interpretation. It must only be spoken aloud if an interpreter is present, and it must be used only two, or at the most three, times in a meeting. We will consider this further in the next talk when we examine Paul’s teaching on the gift of interpretation.

[1] There are of course many documented cases of tongues being recognised as the language of someone listening. See two examples from my own ministry recorded in Signs from Heaven – Why I believe.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 7. We’re Nothing without Love – 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

1 Corinthians 13 is one of the best-known chapters in the Bible. It is often chosen as a reading at weddings and is widely recognised as one of the greatest statements that has ever been written on the nature of love. I well remember how it was read on the first and last day of every term in the Chapel at Brentwood School where I attended as a pupil in the 1950s.

Verses 4-8 are a favourite source of sermon material for many a preacher and Christians have often been challenged to replace the word love with their own name and ask how true these verses are in their own lives. By contrast, of course, all Paul says about love is wonderfully true as we look at the life of the Lord Jesus, and I confess I find it easier to use his name, rather than mine, to replace love throughout these verses:

4 Jesus is patient, Jesus is kind…

So there can be no doubt that the truths Paul teaches about love in this chapter extend far beyond the context in which it is set. But they do nevertheless have an immediate relevance to all he is saying throughout chapters 11-14 about what should happen when Christians meet to worship the Lord.

And that is what we will be considering in this talk. How does 1 Corinthians 13 affect our understanding of chapter 14, and of 14:26 in particular?

We will divide the chapter into three sections:

· It’s all meaningless without love (1-3)

· The nature of love (4-8)

· Recognising our limitations (8-12)

It’s all meaningless without love (1-3)

In the opening verses of the chapter Paul says:

1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

The general sense of this passage is very clear and requires little comment here [1]. In saying this, however, we must be careful not to diminish its importance. Its clarity must not detract from its urgency. Nothing is more important than love. Whatever gifts we may have and whatever we may do, if our motive is not love, it counts for nothing. Without love I am nothing (2) and I gain nothing (3).

This principle applies to every function of the body of Christ, not just to the things mentioned in these verses, which are just illustrations of it. As we saw in the last talk, every part of the body is needed. Every member is important. And when one member suffers, we all suffer (12:26). Each member should have equal concern for every other (12:25). And now in chapter 13 Paul says that the only way that all this is possible is when we love one another.

So the things Paul refers to in verses 1-3 are just illustrations of the great principle of the paramount importance of love. But why does he choose these particular illustrations to make his point? The answer must surely lie in the particular problems facing the church in Corinth at the time. It’s evident from chapter 14 that there were problems in Corinth with their use of gifts like speaking in tongues and prophecy which are the two gifts he mentions first here in chapter 13. And the reference to knowledge may well reflect what Paul has said in chapter 8 about food sacrificed to idols, where he stresses the importance of love compared with knowledge:

We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know. But the man who loves God is known by God (1-3).

This, along with the final verses of chapter 1, indicates that some of the Corinthians were in danger of boasting about their knowledge and wisdom. There Paul reminds them that they would be nothing if it were not for the fact that God had chosen them and called them:

Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth.

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things – and the things that are not – to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him.

It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God – that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord" (1:26-31).

This is surely why he reminds them in 13:4 that Love… does not boast. And it may well account for the inclusion of faith that can move mountains (13:2). Spiritual gifts are charismata. They come from God’s grace. There is no room for boasting, however greatly God may have used us.

So as we later consider Paul’s encouragement in 14:26 for all to participate by bringing a contribution to our meetings, we need to remember that whatever we may bring must be brought in love and that, of course, includes humility. But now we need to consider how verses 4-8 might affect our understanding of 14:26.

The nature of love (4-8)

As I have already acknowledged, these verses have a far wider application than our understanding of chapter 14. But chapter 13 is no mere parenthesis. It is set firmly between Paul’s teaching in chapter 12 on the importance of the role of every Christian within the church as the body of Christ and his application of that principle in chapter 14 where he gives specific direction as to how certain roles are to function when the church is gathered for worship.

Furthermore, the link in Paul’s thinking between chapters 13 and 14 is clearly established in 14:1 where he says:

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.

As we will see in the next talk, the underlying principle of all he says in chapter 14 is putting other people first which is surely the main way in which we express our love for them. Prophecy, for example, is to be desired more than tongues because it edifies others, not just ourselves (14:1-5). So his teaching on the nature of love in 13:4-8 has a direct application to our understanding of chapter 14 and of 14:26 in particular. But how? Paul says:

Some of these wonderful attributes of love are more obviously applicable to the contents of chapter 14 than others. So it is these that we’ll consider here, bearing in mind that they have a wider relevance that’s beyond the scope of our present discussion.

Love is patient

In a gathering where each member is encouraged to contribute something for the edification of the others (14:26), there is an evident need for patience. Waiting one’s turn isn’t always easy, especially when some people are praying or prophesying at great length. As a preacher I confess that I have often been somewhat lacking in patience when the musicians are prolonging the worship to a point where I am wondering if there will be enough time left for me say all that I believe God’s given me to say. But then I do well to remember that the congregation may well need to be patient with me!

Love is kind… it is not rude

Consideration for others is so important if the meeting is to meet its full potential. My old pastor, Alfred Webb, used to compare the time available in a meeting to a cake. If there were six people around the table, hopefully you wouldn’t dream of taking more than one sixth of the cake! So, he said, don’t take more than a fair share of the time available. Be kind. Making way for others is certainly taught in 14:30 where Paul encourages someone who is prophesying to stop if someone else has a revelation to share.

Of course, kindness in a meeting can take many forms, but perhaps one of the most important is with regard to judging other people’s contributions to the meeting. Paul encourages us to try to excel in the use of the gifts God has given us (14:12), but that implies that the level at which we use them may not always be at the highest, and we are in need of kindness when this is clearly the case with regard to the contributions of others.

Love does not boast…It is not proud… It does not envy

We have already noted that pride was a major problem at Corinth – pride in who their favourite preacher was (ch.1), pride in their tolerance (ch. 5), pride in their knowledge (ch. 8), and possibly, here in chapter 13, pride that they were able, so they believed, to speak the languages of angels (v1). There is also a suggestion of pride in 14:37 where Paul says:

If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command.

No doubt it would have been difficult for some to submit to Paul’s apostolic authority in this matter, but the key to humility is the understanding that we are what we are by God’s grace (15:10). Pride and boasting are totally inappropriate for a Christian:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do (Ephesians 2:8-10).

All that we have and all that we are is by the grace of God. And this includes the gifts that we may use in our meetings. They are charismata. They come from God’s grace. So there’s no basis for pride, and there should really be no need for us to envy our fellow Christians, but sadly it’s all too possible to do so.

We may envy the gifts God has given them, or the amount of time allotted to them, or the prominence given to them in the meeting. But if we love them we will be glad for them. Why am I glad when my children and grandchildren are taking part in the meetings? Because I love them! But as a Christian I am called to love every member of the body of Christ, and I should rejoice with them (12:26) when they are honoured.

Love is not self-seeking

That this was a problem in Corinth is clear from the fact that at the Lord’s supper – which at that time would have been a meal rather than the tiny emblems that are generally used today – some were going hungry while others were getting drunk:

For as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk (11:21).

It’s not surprising, therefore, that this self-centred attitude manifested itself in other areas too, as we see in the opening verses of chapter 14. The Corinthians were edifying themselves by speaking in tongues (v.4) but needed to be encouraged to prophesy so that others might be edified. But this is something we will address in more detail in the next talk.

Love… rejoices with the truth… It always protects

Much of what Paul writes in his epistles is there for the express purpose of safeguarding the truth. What we believe is of vital importance. It determines our eternal destiny. And nowhere is this more important than when we are gathered together in church. Among the things that Paul encourages in 14:26 is a word of instruction – literally a teaching.

Love is to be the motive for all that we do, and that includes teaching. In Mark 6:34 we read that Jesus was moved with compassion for the people because they were like sheep without a shepherd, and so he began to teach them many things. In John 8:31-32 he said:

If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.

Love was the motive for his teaching and its purpose was to set people free. The same must be true of those who bring a word of instruction in our meetings.

But the need for truth is relevant not only to teaching, but also to prophecy. As we shall see in the next section, we know in part and we prophesy in part (13:9). Our knowledge and prophetic insight are limited. That’s why we all have a responsibility to weigh carefully what is said (14:29).

Recognising our limitations (8-12)

Love never fails, but where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

The overall sense of these verses is very clear. Paul has already taught us that supernatural gifts are pointless unless they are motivated by love (1-3). He has explained what he means by love and extolled its virtues (4-8). Now in verses 8-13 he makes it clear that, although there will ultimately be no need for supernatural gifts, love will remain for ever. It never fails (8). It remains (13).

In Chapter One we discussed what Paul means by perfection in verse 10. We rejected the views of the cessationists who believe that perfection refers to the completion of the canon of Scripture. The supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit will be at work in the church right up until the Lord’s return. In the age to come, prophecy will not be needed – it will have already been fulfilled! Words of knowledge will be unnecessary – we shall know fully, even as we are known! But until then, these wonderful gifts are essential to the effective witness and worship of the church.

But wonderful though these gifts are, their operation is not infallible. We know in part and we prophesy in part. The contributions Paul is encouraging in 14:26 must be understood in this light. God’s gifts are perfect, but we are not. We do not yet see face to face. Paul says, we know… we prophesy. The gifts come from God but they come through us, and we are fallible.

This must affect our understanding of all that Paul says in chapter 14, not just verse 26. As we eagerly desire spiritual gifts we are to try to excel in our use of them (12). This clearly implies that it’s possible to exercise them without excelling in them. That’s why words of prophecy need to be weighed carefully (29) and why Paul found it necessary to give instruction as to how the gifts should be used. Had the operation of the gifts been infallible, such instruction would have been unnecessary.

In short, whatever contribution we may make during the course of a meeting, we must always be aware of our own fallibility. Paul encourages us to participate (26), but to make sure that we do so in love. Our use of spiritual gifts may well be imperfect, but he tells us to eagerly desire them (14:1) nevertheless. But that’s something we will consider in more detail in the next talk.

[1] In Body Builders I have already discussed what Paul means with regard to controversial issues like the meaning of tongues of angels and whether martyrdom is a gift of the Spirit. I see no need to repeat my arguments here, as these things are not, in my view, directly relevant to the subject of this series.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 6 Everyone is needed

1 Corinthians 12:12-31

In our first talk we saw from 1 Corinthians 14:26 that one of the features to be expected when Christians meet together is the power of the Holy Spirit manifested in the use of supernatural gifts which are given as the Holy Spirit determines to individual Christians for the benefit of the church.

In this talk we’ll be considering 1 Corinthians 12:12-31 and its bearing on those words in 14:26 where Paul says every one of you has. His clear intention is that they should all actively participate in the worship of the church, but they needed to do so in a spirit of unity and love. Their lack of love was evident from the serious divisions in the church (chapters 1-4), their need to consider others in the way they exercised their freedom (chapters 8-10), and their selfish behaviour at the Lord’s Supper described in chapter 11.

In the light of all this, it’s easy to understand why Paul felt the need to address the question of unity in chapter 12, of the importance of love in chapter 13, and of the need to put other people first in chapter 14. Keeping all this in mind will help us to understand more clearly the passage in 12:12-31.

We also need to remember that in the first part of the chapter Paul has been dealing with supernatural gifts. This is the immediate context of the passage we are about to consider. In verse 12 Paul says:

For the body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ.

The use of the word for shows that there is a link between what Paul has just said in verse 11 with what he’s about to say in verse 12, and this indicates that supernatural gifts are still very much in mind. However, the subject is now broader and Paul’s teaching applies, not just to supernatural gifts, but to every function of the body, by which Paul clearly means the church, the body of Christ. He is drawing a parallel between the church and the human body. Just as each human being has one body which is made up of many parts, so too the church, which is the body of Christ, is one body with many parts.

Paul goes on to develop this theme in the following verses where the major theme is unity and interdependence in the midst of diversity. He shows that all the members of the body are different (diversity) but are united by the fact that they are all part of the same body and empowered by the same Spirit (unity). Each part of the body is dependent on each of the other parts. Everyone is needed (interdependence). Just as the parts of the human body all need each other, so the individual members of the church all need each other.

The table below outlines the verse references for each of these themes:

Diversity: 4, 5, 6, 8-11, 12, 14, 20, 28.

Unity: One Spirit: 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13.

One Body: 12, 13, 20, 24-25.

Interdependence: 21, 25, 26.

We will now consider this in more detail under the following headings:

· The illustration of the human body (14-26)

· The illustration applied to the church (27-31).

The illustration of the human body (14-26)

Paul’s use of the human body as an illustration of the church and its members is easy enough for even a child to understand. He reminds us that our body is not made up of one part but of many (14). He then mentions different parts of the body – feet, hands, ears, and eyes – to point out that every part of the body is needed. Just because a foot is not a hand, it does not mean that it’s not part of the body (15) and just because an ear is not an eye, it does not mean that it’s not part of the body (16). In fact,

If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? (17).

Paul then goes on to say that God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be (18). And because it is God who has done so, it follows that every part is necessary. No part can say to another, I don't need you (20-21). Even the weaker and unpresentable parts are indispensable (22-23).

And that’s why there should be no division in the body. Its unity is expressed in all the parts having equal concern for each other (25) and the fact that,

If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honoured, every part rejoices with it (26).

Now it should be clear that in this passage Paul has been reminding the Corinthians of things they already know about their own physical bodies. But by telling them at the beginning (12) that the church is the body he is really concerned with, he knows that the Corinthians will have a pretty good idea of what he is getting at.

And so should we. The key lessons are as follows:

· The church is the body of Christ (12, 27)

· The parts (or members) of that body are individual Christians (27).

· Every member is different from all the others, but every member needs all the others (21).

· Every member is needed because God has put them just where he wants them to be (18, 24). Everyone is indispensable (22). Everyone is special (23).

· No member should ever say of themselves, I am not a part of the body (15-17). We mustn’t think of ourselves as useless. Whether we believe it or not, like it or not, we belong to the body.

· No member should ever say of another member, They are not a part of the body. We mustn’t think of anyone as useless (21-24).

· All the members should have equal concern for each other (25).

We’ll consider how all this affects our understanding of 14:26 after we have examined verses 27-31.

The illustration applied to the church (27-31)

In verse 27 Paul says:

Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.

Paul now begins to apply to the church the principles he has been teaching in verses 12-26, and it’s important at this stage to remind ourselves of something we have mentioned already. What Paul is saying is not only applicable to when we gather together for worship – though that, of course, is our main focus in this book – but to the wider ministry of the church. The body of Christ is at work 24/7, not just for an hour or so on Sundays! This is reflected in verse 28, where Paul says:

And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.

Here Paul lists some of the different gifts and ministries that function within the body of Christ. These are not intended as an exhaustive list, but as representative samples of how different parts of the body are at work, whether in a church meeting or outside it.

It is not my intention to discuss in detail the precise nature of each of these gifts. I have already done so at length in my book Body Builders – Gifts to make God’s people grow, (where, incidentally, I suggest that the Greek translated by NIV as those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, might be better understood to refer to the roles of deacons and elders).

But what’s important here is to notice that Paul begins by saying GOD has appointed. This reemphasises what he has already said in verses 18 and 24:

GOD has arranged (18) and GOD has combined (24).

We are what we are because that’s what GOD has made us, and that’s why every member of the body is important. Whether we are an Ephesians 4:11 gift, like apostle, prophet, or teacher, or whether we have supernatural gifts like working miracles, or healing, or speaking in tongues, we need to understand that it is by the grace of God that we are what we are and have what we have. As Paul later says of himself,

by the grace of God I am what I am (15:10).

Here Paul is referring to his role as a church leader, an apostle, and it’s significant that, in the list we are now considering, he puts apostles first. And although it’s unlikely that he’s implying some form of hierarchy when he says, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, it’s clear from chapter 14 (and especially 14:37) that Paul understood that the use of spiritual gifts like prophecy, tongues, and interpretation was subject to his apostolic authority.

Turning now to verses 29-30, we see that Paul repeats (in question form) the list of functions he has mentioned in verse 28 – though note the omission of those able to help others, and those with gifts of administration, which is probably because Paul felt it unnecessary to repeat all the functions listed in verse 28 to make his point. He says:

Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?

The sense of these verses is very clear. The questions are rhetorical. The answer Paul clearly expects to each question is NO. Paul is reiterating his point that just as all the parts of our body are different and have different functions, so too all the members of the church are different and have different roles to play in the body of Christ.

It's particularly important to understand this when we consider the implication of his question, Do all speak in tongues? which clearly indicates that all do not. This is sometimes used as an argument against the teaching that we should expect to speak in tongues when we are baptised in the Holy Spirit, but that argument is easily dismissed when we bear in mind the context of Paul’s question which, as we have seen, relates to functions within the church.

This is confirmed by his next question, Do all interpret? The purpose of the gift of interpretation of tongues is the edification of the church (14:5) and it is clear, therefore, that when Paul says Do all speak in tongues? he is referring to the use of tongues in church. However, in chapter 14 Paul distinguishes between the use of tongues in church and its use in private:

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue (18-19).

This surely indicates that in private Paul valued highly his ability to speak in tongues.

This is how he could pray with his spirit (14:14-15) and was a valuable way of edifying himself spiritually (14:4), but in church his teaching gift would be of more benefit to other members of the body of Christ.

Once we have understood the clear distinction Paul makes between the use of tongues in church and its use in private, the meaning of his question in 12:30 becomes very clear.

Does everybody speak in tongues with a view to its being interpreted for the edification of the church? No.

That does not mean, however, that it would not be beneficial for every Christian to speak in tongues privately in order to pray with the spirit. And that ability, as we have seen from Acts, was imparted when new converts were baptised in the Holy Spirit.

But we must now turn our attention to how Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 12 affects our understanding of 14:26, where he says:

1 Corinthians 14:26 in the light of chapter 12

In our first talk we identified three key principles in this verse – participation, variety, and edification. These principles may be seen as a summary of all that Paul is teaching in these chapters and all three are implicit in his teaching in chapter 12. In fact, what Paul says in chapter 12 enriches our understanding of what he means in 14:26.

With regard to participation, in 14:26 Paul says, When you come together, everyone has… or as later versions of NIV put it, each of you has. The implication is that every member of the body has the potential to bring something to the meeting that will be a blessing to others.

In chapter 12 we see examples of the kind of things that people might bring, and we’re told that in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work (6). The Spirit distributes his gifts to each one, just as he determines (11). And, as we have seen, the major emphasis of verses 12-26 is that every part of the body is needed. The head cannot say to the hand, I don’t need you (21). So, if everyone is needed, there must surely be room for them to participate.

With regard to the variety, in 14:26 Paul mentions a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. There are three main elements here – the musical, the doctrinal, and the supernatural. We will say more about these when we reach chapter 14, but it’s evident that Paul expected all these elements to be present when Christians meet in church.

It's interesting that in chapter 12 Paul appears to say nothing about the musical, though it would undoubtedly be included in the different kinds of service he mentions in verse 5. He also says little in this chapter about the doctrinal, although its importance is strongly implied in verse 1 where he says that he does not want his readers to be ignorant, and he mentions teachers in verse 28. But we need have no doubt about Paul’s view of the importance of sound doctrine, which is evidently his major purpose in writing his letters and becomes very evident in his teaching in chapter 15 on the most important doctrine of all – the resurrection of Christ.

However, if in chapter 12 he has nothing to say directly about the musical, and relatively little to say about the doctrinal, he has plenty to say about the supernatural. We have already seen that the gifts he lists in verses 8-10 are supernatural gifts, that the supernatural is still in mind in his illustration of the human body as the body of Christ, the church, and that supernatural gifts are still very much in evidence towards the end of the chapter in verses 28 and 29. It seems likely, therefore, that the variety he has in mind in 14:26 would be far wider than the things he mentions there, and could well include any or all of the gifts and ministries he has talked about in chapter 12.

That brings us finally to the principle of edification of which Paul speaks in 14:26 when he says that all of these must be done for the strengthening (or edification) of the church. We will say much more about this when we come to chapter 14, where edification is the dominant theme of the chapter. For now it’s sufficient to note that it also underlies his teaching in chapter 12. The gifts of the Spirit are distributed for the good of all (7). We are baptised in the Spirit for the benefit of the church (13). And each part of the body has been placed there by God for the benefit of all the members because we all need each other (14-26).

So chapter 12 enhances our understanding of what Paul teaches in 14:26, but it also sets the context for our understanding of what he about to say about love in 1 Corinthians 13. But that’s the subject of our next talk.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 5 Baptism in the Spirit (3)

Applying what we’ve learnt from Acts to 1 Corinthians 12:13

In this series we are looking at what we should expect in our meetings as we gather together to worship the Lord. We have suggested that 1 Corinthians 14:26 gives a clear indication about this and have noted among other things the importance of congregational participation and variety of manifestation, including supernatural gifts like speaking in tongues and interpretation.

We’ve examined the supernatural gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:8-11 and noted our total dependence on the Holy Spirit if these gifts are to be in operation in our meetings. We are now considering the significance of 1 Corinthians 12:13, and I have argued that in this verse Paul is talking about the same experience as Jesus spoke about in Acts 1:5-8, and several examples of which we see later in Acts.

In our last talk we examined those examples in more detail and discovered that the baptism in the Spirit was promised by Jesus in Acts 1:5, was received by the first disciples when they were filled with the Spirit in Acts 2:4, was made available to all who would repent and be baptised (Acts 2:38), and received by subsequent disciples in Acts chapters 8, 9. 10, and 19. We saw that the baptism in the Spirit is not the same as the Spirit’s work in salvation or sanctification, but is an enduement with power for service accompanied by miraculous manifestations including speaking in tongues.

Today we’ll be considering how all this applies to what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:13, and perhaps the first thing to say is that, because the baptism in the Spirit was so vital to the experience of the early church, it’s unthinkable that Paul could have a radically different understanding of what it means to be baptised in the Spirit from what we have discovered in Acts. So what we’ve learnt from Acts must inform our understanding of what he means in 1 Corinthians 12:13 when, following my translation, he says that we were all baptised in the Spirit for the benefit of the one body.

In Talk 3 I began by arguing that the first part of 1 Corinthians 12:13 should be understood to mean that Christians are baptised in the Spirit for the benefit of the church. The supernatural gifts listed in verses 8-11 come as a result of believers being baptised in the Spirit and are to be used for the benefit of the whole church (13). We then saw in Talk 4 that in Acts the baptism in the Spirit is a supernatural experience accompanied by charismatic gifts including speaking in tongues.

So, both in Acts and in 1 Corinthians, baptism in the Spirit is closely related to supernatural gifts. But in Acts the emphasis is on evangelism, while in Corinthians it’s on the edification of the church. Or to put it slightly differently, in Acts the gifts which result from the baptism in the Spirit enable those who are not yet believers to come to faith, while in Corinthians they edify those who are already believers and strengthen their faith.

I see, then, no disharmony between Acts and 1 Corinthians 12:13 with regard to the baptism in the Spirit. The difference in emphasis is easily understood in the light of the fact that in Acts Luke is primarily concerned with evangelism in the power of the Spirit, and in 1 Corinthians 12-14 Paul is concerned with pastoral issues relating to the use of spiritual gifts in the worship of the church. The baptism in the Spirit enables both.

So, if we’re to expect the supernatural in our meetings (14:26, 12:1-11 etc), we are totally dependent on the Holy Spirit, and since spiritual gifts are operated by individual Christians, it’s vital that those who do so are baptised in the Holy Spirit. I say this because, from everything we have said so far, it should be clear that the baptism in the Spirit is what has often been referred to as the gateway to the supernatural gifts of the Spirit.

Personally, I have reached this conclusion because I believe that we must decide what to believe on the basis of what we understand the Bible teaches, not on the basis of our experience. Once we have done that, we may evaluate our experience in the light of Scripture , rather than trying to read our experience into God’s word.

So, if what we have been saying about the meaning of 1 Corinthians 12:13 is correct, it must surely follow that from a biblical perspective the reception and operation of supernatural gifts will be preceded by the baptism in the Spirit. And as far as Acts is concerned, it is significant that the baptism in the Spirit always came before the manifestation of spiritual gifts .

The first disciples did not begin to speak in tongues until they were first filled with the Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:4). The same is true of Cornelius and his household (Acts 10:44-46). And in Acts 19:1-6 the Ephesians spoke in tongues and prophesied after the Holy Spirit came upon them. Indeed, the fact that people were usually baptised in the Spirit on the day they were saved suggests that the manifestation of spiritual gifts before being baptised in the Spirit would have been unlikely.

But can we insist that the baptism in the Spirit must precede the manifestation of spiritual gifts? After all, we read that Jesus’ disciples worked miracles and this was, of course, before their baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost . However, as we examine these passages in the gospels we discover that they did so in a special authority delegated to them by Jesus at that time. After Jesus went away, they needed the Spirit if they were to continue to work miracles (cf. John 14).

So in my view the baptism in the Spirit is rightly understood to be the gateway to spiritual gifts . Indeed, we might well ask how anyone could expect to manifest the gifts that come from the Spirit without first being filled with the Spirit himself. But we must now consider how all this works out in practice.

The idea that the baptism in the Spirit is rightly understood from a biblical perspective to be the gateway to supernatural gifts raises certain practical questions with regard to how this teaching should be applied today. What, for example, can we say of Christians who exercise spiritual gifts but who either would not claim to have been baptised in the Spirit or who do not believe in the baptism in the Spirit? How do we explain this and what should be our attitude to such people?

In my view we should certainly not say that their gifts are not genuine! Personally, I distinguish between what I see in the Bible , and therefore teach, and what God in his grace may do today even if it is not completely in line with my understanding of the biblical pattern. It seems to me that God is far more willing to give than we are to receive. He is longing to lavish his gifts upon his people if only we would desire them more! This means that he is pleased when any of his children seek after any spiritual gift , whether or not they have come to understand or believe in the baptism in the Holy Spirit .

This may well explain why some have been greatly used in healing even though they have a different understanding of what it means to be baptised in the Spirit . In my view we should thank God for the way he is using them, but still encourage them to receive the baptism in the Spirit with its accompanying blessing of speaking in tongues , for how else will they be able to pray with their spirit (1 Corinthians 14:14ff)?

But instead of looking at the experience of others we would do better to consider our own. If we have been baptised in the Spirit , we should press on to the gifts by eagerly desiring them and praying for them [1]. And if we have not yet received the baptism in the Spirit, we should ask God to fill us today. Our heavenly Father does give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him (Luke 11:13) and Jesus said that if we are thirsty we will drink (John 7:37-39). As we reach out in faith he will not disappoint us [2] .

To summarise, then, I believe that in 1 Corinthians 12:13 Paul is referring to the same experience as Luke describes in Acts, where Christians receive the power of the Spirit accompanied by the manifestation of supernatural gifts. Those gifts are vitally important, not only in confirming the message of the gospel, but also when Christians are gathered together in worship. It follows, therefore, that, if we are to see them in operation in our meetings as Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 14:26, we need to encourage all Christians to be baptised in the Spirit. It is only through the power of the Spirit that we can properly fulfil our purpose as members of the body of Christ.

[1] See Body Builders, Chapter 15.

[2] For practical help on how to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit , see The Holy Spirit – an Introduction, Chapter 7.

See also A New Dimension – How to be filled with the Holy Spirit available from www.davidpetts.org

View Details

When you come together

Talk 4 Baptism in the Spirit (2)

Baptism in the Spirit in the book of Acts

Baptism in the Spirit in the book of Acts

We’ve examined the supernatural gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:8-11 and noted our total dependence on the Holy Spirit if these gifts are to be in operation in our meetings. We are now considering the significance of 1 Corinthians 12:13, and in our last talk I argued that in this verse Paul is talking about the same experience as Jesus spoke about in Acts 1:5-8, and several examples of which we see later in Acts. In this talk we’ll be looking at those examples in more detail in order to help us better understand what it means to be baptised in the Spirit.

This will be important because in 1 Corinthians 12:13 Paul does not define baptism in the Spirit. This is almost certainly because he knows that the Corinthians will understand his terminology. He is using their knowledge of an experience with which they were already familiar to illustrate the unity of the body of Christ. So for us to understand what he means by baptism in the Spirit we need to turn to the book of Acts which often describes experiences referred to in the epistles and helps us understand them.

To begin with, it will be helpful to understand that although Acts contains only two references to the words, You will be baptised in the Holy Spirit[1], it’s clear that Luke uses a variety of expressions to refer to the same experience. These include:

Receiving the gift the Father had promised (1:4)
Being baptised in the Holy Spirit (1:5)
The power of the Spirit coming or falling on you (1:8, 8:16, 10:44)
Being filled with the Spirit (2:4).
Receiving (the gift of) the Holy Spirit (2:38, 8:15, 8:17, 8:19, 10:47, 19:2).

So all these expressions are references to the baptism in the Spirit and teach us something about it. For example, we’ve already noted that in Acts 1:5 Jesus said:

Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptised with water, but in a few days you will be baptised in the Holy Spirit’…

He goes on to clarify its meaning in Acts 1:8 when he says:

…you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.

And the power they were to receive from the Spirit was supernatural, miracle-working power, as the opening verses of Acts 2 make clear:

When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them (Acts 2:1-4).

The promise that Jesus had made them was fulfilled. He had told them to wait for the gift that God had promised (Acts 1:4) and that they would be baptised in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5). This would be the power of the Holy Spirit coming on them empowering them to be witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8). And this happened on the day of Pentecost when the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak languages they had never learned (Acts 2:4).

As a result of this amazing miracle, a large crowd gathered and, after Peter had preached the gospel to them, over 3000 people were added to the church. Acts goes on to tell us how, through the power of the Holy Spirit, thousands more people became Christians and churches were established throughout the then-known world.

But there’s more that we can learn from Acts about what it means to be baptised in the Spirit. Please note carefully the following points:

It’s not the same as becoming a Christian.
It’s not the same as sanctification.
It’s a supernatural experience.
It’s available to every Christian in every generation.

It’s not the same as becoming a Christian

The first thing to notice is that when the disciples were filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost they were already followers of Jesus. Their experience of the Spirit that day was not what made them Christians. They had already left all to follow Jesus (Matthew 19:27). They had confessed that he was the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). He had told them that they were already clean (John 15:3) and that their names were written in Heaven (Luke 10:20). But until Pentecost they were not yet baptised in the Spirit.

We see something similar when we look at the Samaritans who were converted through Philip’s preaching in Acts 8. They had believed Philip as he had preached the gospel to them and they had been baptised (v. 12), but the Holy Spirit had not yet ‘come upon’ any of them (v. 16). However, when Peter and John placed their hands on them (v.17), they received the Holy Spirit.

Other examples in Acts are the apostle Paul who was converted on the road to Damascus but was not filled with the Spirit until Ananias had laid his hands on him (Acts 9:3-17), and the Ephesians in Acts 19:1-6. The Spirit came on them after Paul had laid hands on them after he had baptised them in water after he had explained to them that it was Jesus who was the Christ about whom John the Baptist had told them. (Note, too, from the examples we have mentioned that the baptism in the Spirit was often received through the laying on of hands, but in the New Testament this was never used to impart salvation).All these examples show us that, when Luke uses expressions like ‘being baptised in the Spirit’, ‘being filled with the Spirit’, ‘receiving the Spirit’, ‘the Spirit coming upon a person’, he is not talking about the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives which brings about our conversion. Being baptised in the Spirit is different from being born again[2].

It’s not the same as sanctification

The next thing to notice from the Book of Acts is that being baptised in the Spirit is not the same as sanctification. It’s something that happens suddenly. Let’s go back to the first few verses of Acts 2. For ten days the disciples had been waiting for the coming of the Holy Spirit. They were no more filled with the Spirit on the ninth day than they had been on the first day! But on the tenth day, the day of Pentecost, they were suddenly (v. 2) filled with the Spirit (v. 4). This is clear from the use of the word ‘suddenly’ in verse 2 and from the tense of the Greek verb which Luke uses in verse 4. And the same is true of the verb used in Acts 4:31 when the disciples were filled again with the Holy Spirit[3].

Other examples in Acts include Acts 1:5 where Jesus promises his disciples that they will be ‘baptised’ in the Holy Spirit and Peter’s statement in Acts 11:15 that the Holy Spirit ‘fell on’ Cornelius[4]. Falling seems to suggest something that happens suddenly and ‘baptism’ – always by immersion in the New Testament – can certainly not be administered gradually! This is important because some Christians have mistakenly confused being filled with the Spirit with the gradual process of sanctification that takes place in our lives day by day as we seek to become more like Jesus.

So, being baptised in the Spirit is a sudden experience that’s not to be confused with regeneration[5] or with sanctification. But it’s also important to understand that it’s a supernatural experience.

It’s a supernatural experience

We only need to read Acts 2:1-4 again to see that being baptised with the Spirit is a supernatural experience. They saw supernatural tongues of fire, heard the supernatural wind of the Spirit, and spoke by supernatural power languages they had never learned. In Acts there is a clear connection between the initial experience of the baptism in the Spirit and speaking in tongues (Acts 2:4, 10:46, 19:6).

In fact, wherever there is a full description of people being baptised in Spirit, the first thing to be recorded immediately afterwards is that those who received the Spirit spoke in tongues (Acts 2:4, 10:46, 19:6). In Acts 10:46, for example, it was how Peter and his companions knew that the new converts in Cornelius’s household has been baptised in the Spirit.

But their experience of the Spirit was not to be limited to speaking in tongues. The baptism in the Spirit accompanied by speaking in tongues was only the gateway to other mighty gifts. As we read on in Acts we see that by the same supernatural power of the Spirit they healed the sick (Chapters 3, 5, 8, 9, 14, 19, 28), cast out demons (Chapters 8, 16, 19) and even raised the dead (Chapters 9 and 20). As a result, thousands were added to the church (Acts 2:41, 4:4).

So Acts paints a picture of the baptism in the Spirit, which is in itself a supernatural experience, but which leads to further manifestations of the miraculous which confirm the preaching of the gospel and lead to the formation of churches. And these things were not just for the early disciples.

It’s available to every Christian in every generation

This is made clear in Acts 2:38-39 where Peter says to the crowd:

Repent and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off - for all whom the Lord our God will call.

The gift of the Holy Spirit is available to all who will repent and be baptised. It was not just for those Peter was speaking to in Acts 2, but for their children and all those of future generations who would become Christians.

And, as we read on in Acts, we see this promise being fulfilled. The Spirit comes upon the Samaritans (Acts 8), on Paul (Acts 9), on the Roman centurion, Cornelius, and his household (Acts 10), and on the Ephesians (Acts 19). These all had similar experiences to the disciples on the day of Pentecost and nowhere does the New Testament suggest that they are not for today. Indeed, the experience of millions of Christians alive today confirms that it is!

But that does not mean that all have received it. In Acts the normal experience of those coming to faith in Christ was repentance followed immediately by baptism in water and baptism in the Spirit. Those who, like the Samaritans in Acts 8, did not receive the Spirit immediately after they were baptised in water, received soon after through the laying on of the apostles’ hands (Acts 8:17, 19:6). Today, sadly, this is far less common, even among Christians who believe in these things. The root cause of this is, I believe, lack of teaching on the part of church leaders, an issue I will be addressing in the final chapter of the book I am writing on this subject.

So, to summarise, the baptism in the Spirit was promised by Jesus in Acts 1:5, was received by the first disciples when they were filled with the Spirit in Acts 2:4, was made available to all who would repent and be baptised (Acts 2:38), and received by subsequent disciples in Acts chapters 8, 9. 10, and 19. It’s not the same as the Spirit’s work in salvation or sanctification, but is an enduement with power for service accompanied by miraculous manifestations including speaking in tongues.

In our next talk we’ll see how all this applies to what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:13.

[1] Acts 1:5, and Acts 11:16 where Peter quotes the words of Jesus and applies them to the experience of Cornelius

[2] I have written in more detail on this in The Holy Spirit – an Introduction. For more details, please see the books listed at the back of this book.

[3] The verb ‘filled’ is in the Aorist Tense which is ‘strictly the expression of a momentary or transient, single action’ (Analytical Greek Lexicon, Bagster).

[4] The Greek verb means ‘fell on’ rather than ‘came on’ as in NIV.

[5] Although it may, as is clearly the case with Cornelius and his household, happen on the same occasion (Acts 10).

View Details

When you come together

Talk 3 Baptism the Spirit (1)

1 Corinthians 12:13

In the introduction to this series of talks we suggested that 1 Corinthians 14:26 gives clear biblical guidelines as to what Christians should expect as they gather together in worship. We noted that these include supernatural manifestations like speaking in tongues, interpretation, and prophecy.

So in our last talk we considered the supernatural gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:1-12 and concluded that all the gifts listed there are supernatural, that all these gifts are certainly for today, and that we should certainly expect to see them in evidence in churches today.

Now such manifestations would clearly be impossible if it were not for the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So it’s not surprising that in 1 Corinthians 12:1-11 there are no less than eight references to the Holy Spirit.

It’s only by the Holy Spirit that we can confess that Jesus is Lord (3). Although we have different gifts, it’s the same Spirit that inspires them all (4). If we have received a gift from the Spirit, it’s not for our benefit alone, but for the good of all the church (7). All these supernatural gifts are given by the same Spirit who gives them to each one, just as he determines (8-11). And in verse 13, Paul goes on to talk about being baptised in the Spirit.

It’s clear, then, that if we are to see these gifts in operation in our meetings, we need the presence and power of the Spirit moving among us. But what exactly does Paul mean in verse 13 when he talks about being baptised in the Holy Spirit?

In this chapter of my book I shall:

examine the meaning of 1 Corinthians 12:13 and explain why I believe it’s a reference to the baptism in the Holy Spirit as described in the book of Acts.
outline what Acts reveals about what it means to be baptised in the Spirit
consider how this relates to our understanding of 1 Corinthians 12:13 and give reasons why we should understand baptism in the Spirit to be the gateway to the supernatural gifts of the Spirit.

Although these three topics are contained in Chapter 2 of the book, I will devote 3 podcasts to them in order to keep each talk relatively brief and to allow time for feedback from you. So today we’ll just be talking about the meaning of 1 Corinthians 12:13. Now please be aware that this will involve consideration of the Greek text, and some listeners might find it a bit complicated. But, please, don’t switch off! I’ll try to explain it as clearly as I can.

The meaning of 1 Corinthians 12:13

The first thing we need to say is that there are several different interpretations of this verse. This arises from the fact that it’s possible to translate the text in a variety of different ways. So I’m going to begin by stating what I believe to be the best way to translate the first part of the verse, where Paul refers to being baptised in the Spirit. He says:

For we were all baptised in one Spirit for one body.

I have emphasised the two prepositions, in and for, because this highlights where my translation differs from the NIV which says:

For we were all baptised by one Spirit into one body…

As we proceed I will justify my decision to translate the verse this way, but at this stage, all we need to determine is what the New Testament church believed about what it means to be baptised in the Spirit, and for our answer we turn to none other than the Lord Jesus himself.

In the first chapter of Acts we read Luke’s account of the very last words that Jesus spoke to his disciples before he finally left them and ascended into Heaven. In Acts 1:4-5 Luke tells us that

On one occasion, while Jesus was eating with them, he gave them this command: ‘Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptised with water, but in a few days you will be baptised with (or in) the Holy Spirit’…

This is the same terminology as Paul uses in 1 Corinthians 12:13. The Greek preposition used in both passages is en. This can carry a variety of meanings, including by and with, but it usually means in.

This means that in Acts 1:5 Jesus is saying

You will be baptised in the Holy Spirit

and in 1 Corinthians 12:13 Paul is saying

We were all baptised in one Spirit…

It seems reasonable, therefore, to conclude that Paul is referring to the same experience, and since, in Acts, supernatural gifts like speaking in tongues followed the disciples being baptised in the Spirit (Acts 2:4, 10:44-46, 19:6), it’s not at all surprising that Paul mentions baptism in the Spirit in close connection with supernatural gifts.

However, this understanding is challenged by versions such as NIV which translates the first part of 1 Corinthians 12:13 as follows:

For we were all baptised by one Spirit into one body…

or, in later NIV versions:

For we were all baptised by one Spirit so as to form one body…

We can deal with the translation of en very briefly. Does it mean in or by? Although NIV translates it as by, it recognises in a footnote that in is a possible alternative. And as I have already pointed out, en usually means in, and that’s how ESV translates it here in 12:13. But, in a way, the English translation is not so important. What matters is that in the original Greek text, both Acts 1:5 and 1 Corinthians 12:13 use the word en. And that clearly suggests that what Paul is talking about is the same experience of the Spirit as Jesus referred to in Acts 1:5.

But there’s a further problem with the NIV translation of this verse. You will have noticed from the two quotes above that the NIV translators appear to have changed their mind about the next part of the verse. Earlier versions say into one body while later versions say so as to form one body. In my view, neither of these translations is entirely satisfactory, but, to explain why, we need to look at the possible meanings of another Greek preposition – eis.

Although this can, and very often does, mean into, this is by no means its only meaning. In the New Testament it is frequently used to mean for and often conveys the idea of purpose.

The Greek expression eis polemon, for example, is used in the context of preparing for war and the phrase eis ti means ‘for what?’ or ‘why?’

A highly significant example of this use is found in Matthew 3:11 where baptism in the Spirit is contrasted with baptism in water. Here eis does not carry the force of ‘into’, for repentance was required before John would baptise, as the preceding verses make clear. Accordingly NIV translates, I baptise you in water for repentance. By analogy, the baptism in the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:13 no more puts a person into the body than baptism in water puts them into repentance.

More important still, we know that Paul himself understood and used eis with this force as is demonstrated by the NIV translation of eis as ‘for’ in, for example, 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Ephesians 4:30. So eis certainly can mean for the purpose of. This is supported by the fact that, as we’ve just seen, later NIV versions translate it as, so as to form which recognises the fact that eis can convey the idea of purpose.

But the NIV translation suggests that the purpose of our being baptised in the Spirit is to form one body, the body of Christ, the church. However, the words to form are not found in the Greek text, but NIV translators have clearly felt it necessary to supply some additional words to clarify the meaning of eis. However, in doing so they have, in my view, applied the meaning of eis too narrowly.

Of course, it’s possible that Paul’s meaning here is that we’re baptised in the Spirit to form the church. After all, the purpose of the disciples being baptised in the Spirit was that they might be witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:5, 8) and the church was formed when they were baptised in the Spirit at Pentecost.

But in my view the context in 1 Corinthians 12 implies more than this. If the baptism in the Spirit is given for the purpose of forming the church, it is also given for the benefit of the church. The verse is set in a context where Paul is discussing the use of charismatic gifts within the context of the church.

We know from chapter 14 that the Corinthians were using gifts like tongues for their own edification instead of seeking to edify the church (14:1-12). Paul had to teach them that spiritual gifts were not given for their own selfish benefit, but for the good of all. That’s why he says:

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good (12:7),

And if my understanding is correct, he seems to be saying much the same thing in 12:13, which might be paraphrased as follows:

You have been baptised in the Spirit for the good of the whole church, so that by the spiritual gifts which result from that baptism, you might edify, not just yourself, but the whole body of believers.

But do we need to choose between the NIV translation and the one I have suggested? Might not both be implicit in what Paul is saying? As we have seen, eis often carries the idea of purpose. Might there not be a twofold purpose in the baptism in the Spirit, both the formation and the edification of the church? I have argued from the context in which 1 Corinthians 12:13 is set that it’s primarily edification that Paul has in mind.

But as we shall see next time when we turn to baptism in the Spirit in the book of Acts, its purpose is strongly connected with evangelism by which the church is formed. It is also invariably connected with the manifestation of supernatural gifts. Those gifts are vital as signs confirming the message of the gospel. They are no less important in strengthening those who have already come to faith in Christ. The baptism in the Spirit and the gifts that come as the result of it are for both the formation and edification of the church.

To summarise, I believe that in 1 Corinthians 12:13 Paul is talking about the same experience of which Jesus spoke, and examples of which we see in the book of Acts. So if we take seriously the idea that 1 Corinthians 14:26 is an indication of what we should expect when we come together to worship the Lord, we will not only recognise the importance of supernatural gifts, but also of the baptism in the Holy Spirit which is the gateway to the exercise of those gifts.

View Details

When you come together

Talk 2 Supernatural Gifts – 1 Corinthians 12:1-11

As we’ve already seen from what he says in 1 Corinthians 14:26, Paul certainly expected manifestations of the supernatural in the meetings of the church. He refers to a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. But these are by no means the only expressions of the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. In 12:8-10 Paul mentions nine gifts:

a message of wisdom, a message of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, miraculous powers, prophecy, distinguishing between spirits, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues.

In this chapter I will be seeking to answer three questions:

Can we be sure that all these gifts are supernatural?
Can we be sure that all these gifts are for today?
Can we expect that all these gifts will happen in our church?

Can we be sure that all these gifts are supernatural?

To answer this question, we need to look at the immediate context in which these verses are set. In verse 1 Paul tells the Corinthians that he does not want them to be ignorant about spiritual gifts. His usual word for any gift that God may give us is charisma, something which comes from his grace (charis). But here he uses the word pneumatika. This may well indicate that the gifts he has in mind are a unique form of charisma. All God’s gifts are charismata, but only the gifts in these verses are referred to as pneumatika. And verses 2-3 indicate that it’s supernatural gifts that Paul has in mind:

You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.

Before their conversion the Corinthians were idol-worshippers. This meant that they had been involved in devil-worship. This is clear from 10:19-20 where Paul says:

Do I mean then that a sacrifice offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons.

The confession that JESUS IS LORD is what marks a person as a Christian. In Romans 10:9 Paul says:

That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

As Christians, the people in Corinth to whom Paul was writing acknowledged the Lordship of Jesus. So there is no suggestion that they would have manifested demonic gifts, for no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit (v3). But people who were not yet believers and were still worshipping idols could come into their meetings (cf. 14:23) and might well do so.

It was therefore vitally important that Paul’s readers should understand how to distinguish between divine and devilish manifestations. And it’s just as important today. Demons do not acknowledge the Lordship of Jesus, as I once experienced during an encounter with a witch in Chester[1].

Furthermore, unlike demonic manifestations, where different gifts come from different spirits, in Christian worship the different gifts all come from the same Spirit:

There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men (vv.4-6)[2].

Paul draws attention to the many different gifts and ministries in the church and points out that they all have their origin in the same God. The reference to the Trinity in these verses is interesting. Paul seems to be suggesting that the unity and diversity in the Godhead is reflected by a similar unity in the midst of diversity in the church, a theme he is to develop later in the chapter.

So, from the context which immediately precedes the list of gifts in verses 8-10, it seems likely that Paul intends each of these gifts as a supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit, but he does not define them. This suggests that the Corinthians obviously knew what they were. In fact, in 1:7 we read that the Corinthians did not lack any spiritual gift. They knew what they were, but their ignorance lay in the fact that they did not use them correctly.

In the following four paragraphs I have given what I consider to be the most likely definition or description of each gift, but for a more sophisticated analysis please consult what I have said in Body Builders[3].

I have rejected Wayne Grudem’s view that, although most of the gifts in this list are miraculous, a message of wisdom and a message of knowledge are simply the ability to speak with wisdom and knowledge. It seems to me far more likely that, although we cannot be certain about exactly what Paul had in mind, he intends us to understand them as some form of supernatural revelation[4].

As far as the remaining gifts in the list are concerned, what Paul means is fairly clear. Faith is the miracle working faith that can move mountains (cf.13:2). Gifts of healing are miraculous healings performed without medical aid. Miraculous powers are, by definition, miraculous, and probably include miracles that do not come under the category of gifts of healing.

Prophecy, which is to be distinguished from prediction on the one hand and preaching on the other, brings by inspiration of the Spirit words of edification, encouragement, and comfort to the church (14:3). Distinguishing between spirits probably refers to discerning whether a supernatural occurrence is motivated by the Holy Spirit or by an evil spirit, or detecting the presence of evil spirits where their activity might not otherwise be obvious.

Speaking in tongues is speaking a language one has never learned, as the disciples did on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), and interpretation of tongues is the ability imparted by the Spirit to interpret what has been spoken in tongues.

Assuming that these definitions are broadly correct, we see that both the contents of the list and the context in which it is set confirm the view that these gifts are all supernatural. This is further confirmed in verse 13 by Paul’s reference to the baptism in the Holy Spirit which we will consider in the next chapter.

But whether these gifts are all supernatural or not, our contention that we should expect the supernatural in our meetings still holds good. Because, as we have seen, in 14:26 Paul mentions supernatural gifts like tongues and interpretation as part of what can be expected in our meetings. But that raises the next question. Are these gifts all for today?

Can we be sure that all these gifts are for today?

People who believe that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit are not for today are known as cessationists. Perhaps the most common version of cessationism is the view that these gifts were withdrawn once the writing of the New Testament was complete.

Obviously, if they are right about this, then my view that 1 Corinthians 14:26 gives us direction as to what should happen in church today is entirely wrong. But that would make much of what Paul says in chapters 12-14 irrelevant for the church, not only of today, but of the last nineteen centuries!

However, the cessationist view has no valid basis in scripture. The verses that are usually quoted to support their view are I Corinthians 13:8-10, where we read:

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.

Cessationists claim that gifts like prophecy and tongues have ceased because they believe that perfection (v10) came once the word of God was complete. But do they really believe that knowledge has also passed away? And a look at the context quickly reveals that their view is misguided. This is clear from what he says in verse 12:

Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

Paul is looking far beyond the completion of the New Testament. Perfection will come when he sees Jesus face to face. What he sees now is only a poor reflection of what he will see then. Then he will know him completely – fully. This must surely refer to when he sees Jesus in heaven, where tongues and prophecy will not be needed, and ultimately to the return of the Lord at the end of the age. Indeed, Paul strongly implies this when he says in 1 Corinthians 1:7 that the Corinthians do not lack any spiritual gift as they eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed. He clearly expected the gifts to be in evidence until the second coming of Christ.

Finally, the cessationist position does not stand up in the light of present-day Christian experience. For example, there are numerous well documented cases of speaking in tongues being recognised as it was at Pentecost by hearers who recognised it as their own native language[5]. Such miracles can only spring from one of two sources – the divine or the demonic. But Christians who speak in tongues gladly acknowledge the Lordship of Jesus, and that, as we have seen, is the biblical test of that which is truly divine.

Can we expect that all these gifts will happen in our church?

So far we have argued that the gifts listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 are all supernatural, that they are for today, and that we should expect the supernatural in our meetings (14:26). But can we expect all these gifts? The answer to this question in any particular situation will depend on two main factors – divine sovereignty and human responsibility.

In 1 Corinthians 12:11 Paul tells us that

All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

This means that the Holy Spirit decides what gifts he will give to any individual Christian. He knows what’s best for us as individuals. But he also knows what’s best for the church. And no two churches are alike. It follows, therefore, that the gifts manifested in a local church at any particular time will be distributed by the Spirit in accordance with the needs of that church, because the purpose of every gift is the good of the church:

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good (12:7).

This theme is picked up in 14:1-5 where Paul says that prophecy is to be preferred to speaking in tongues, because uninterpreted tongues only edifies the speaker, but prophecy edifies the church. The gifts are given to individuals, but they’re for the benefit of the whole church[6].

So the gifts are given at the discretion of the Holy Spirit. But that does not mean that we have no responsibility in this matter. It’s our responsibility to follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts (14:1).

In some churches there is little or no desire for these gifts simply because they know little about them because their leaders never teach about them or encourage them. I will be saying more about this in the final chapter of this book, but at this stage it’s enough to note that we can’t expect these gifts in our meetings if there’s no desire for them.

But in churches where there is a desire and where the members are encouraged to be filled with the Spirit, it’s safe to assume that at least some of these gifts will be manifested. If the word of God tells us to eagerly desire spiritual gifts then we can be sure that God wants us to have them. As we have already seen, 1 Corinthians 14:26 encourages the use of gifts like tongues and interpretation in our meetings, and 14:1 especially mentions prophecy as a gift to be eagerly desired. And although it would probably be wrong to suggest that these gifts should be in evidence in every meeting, we need to remember that Paul did recommend their use when you come together (14:26)[7].

But what about other gifts like healing, for example? We certainly cannot say that they cannot be used in the context of the gathered church, for all the gifts are given for the benefit of the church (12:7). But it is evident from Mark 16 and the book of Acts that gifts like healing and miracles were very much used in evangelism which usually took place outside and not in a meeting where the church had gathered for worship.

I have no wish to be dogmatic on this matter, but in my view, although miraculous gifts like healing may well be expected in evangelistic meetings held in churches, from a New Testament perspective they would be more effective when used out on the streets, as was most often the case in the book of Acts.

If this view is correct, it’s possible that in 14:26, when talking of supernatural gifts, Paul restricts himself to mentioning those that are usually to be expected in a church meeting. So we should not be surprised if gifts like prophecy, tongues, and interpretation are the gifts that are in greater evidence in our meetings today. But that by no means precludes the possibility of other gifts being manifested as the Holy Spirit determines.

Conclusion

In this chapter we have seen that:

God does not want us to be ignorant about spiritual gifts.
The gifts listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 are supernatural.
Not all supernatural manifestations come from the Holy Spirit. The test that a gift has genuinely come from God is the confession that Jesus is Lord.
Although there is a rich variety of supernatural gifts, each gift is given by the same Spirit.
The gifts are given, as the Holy Spirit determines, to individual Christians for the benefit of the whole church.
The view that these gifts were withdrawn once the writing of the New Testament was complete is entirely mistaken.
These gifts are for today and we should expect them to be regularly in evidence in our meetings.
Where they are not in evidence, this may well be caused by lack of desire, possibly due to a lack of teaching or encouragement on the part of church leaders (especially those who hold a cessationist view).

Finally, two more things should be added:

Although in this chapter we have stressed the supernatural, our natural gifts and talents are also important. All God’s gracious gifts are needed, whether natural or supernatural. We should not be content with the natural, but neither should we minimize its importance.
However much of the supernatural we experience there will always be unanswered questions. We know in part, and we prophesy in part. Who knows why Peter was supernaturally delivered from prison while Stephen was stoned and James was beheaded? Questions like these may never be answered until that day when we know fully, even as we are fully known. Until then, we walk by faith and not by sight, and we must continue to expect the miraculous gifts of the Spirit to be manifest in our lives and in our meetings.

[1] See Body Builders – Gifts to make God’s people grow, pp,240-243.

[2] Notice also the repeated reference to the same Spirit in verses 8-11.

[3]Body Builders – Gifts to make God’s people grow, Part Two,

[4] For detailed discussion on the nature of these two gifts, see Body Builders pp. 247-269.

[5] See, for example, Harris, R.W., Spoken by the Spirit, GPH, Springfield MO, 1973. See also my personal testimony in Body Builders pp.149-151.

[6] Correctly understood, 1 Corinthians 12:13 also illustrates this principle. See Chapter Two.

[7] It’s noteworthy that hotan, the Greek word used here for when, can also carry the sense of whenever.

View Details

When you come together - Introduction Three books – an old one, a new one, and a future one

I know that many of you will be familiar with my book on spiritual gifts, Body Builders – gifts to make God’s people grow. Since it was first published in 2002 it has been translated into several languages, including French, Italian, Finnish, and Amharic. I know it has been regarded by some as something of a Pentecostal classic, and for this I’m very grateful to the Lord. I’m happy to tell you that Body Builders has now been republished in English and is available from my website, www.davidpetts.org price £15.00, (296 pages). (Actually, having a copy of this book would be helpful, but by no means essaential, to refer to in the new series we’re beginning).

Now if you enjoyed my last series on how God speaks to us today, you may be interested to know that this has now been published as a book, The Voice of God – how he speaks to us today. This is now available from my website, price £12.00, (228 pages).

Finally, I have already started writing a new book with the provisional title, When you come together based on 1 Corinthians 14:26 and I’m expecting this to be available by Easter, if not sooner. Today I’ll be sharing with you the Introduction I have written and this will make clear why I’m writing this book and give you some idea of its contents. But that brings me to my suggestion about how we might have more interaction with you. Interaction

We have some idea from the number of downloads my podcasts receive that I am now teaching many more people each week than I ever did in pastoral ministry or as Principal of a Bible College. Such are the wonders of modern technology. However, the amount of interaction with one’s audience is considerably less.

So I’m suggesting that if you have questions about anything I say in a podcast, or if you have any comments on how you think the book I’m writing might be improved, you contact me by email by writing to info@davidpetts.org You will have a good idea of the contents of the book as in each podcast I’ll be sharing with you what I have written, and, as usual, the text will be available on my website. So, if anything is not clear, or of you think there’s something important that I’ve left out, please let me know.

Now I realise that not everyone will want to do this, and that’s fine, but the offer is there if you’d like to get involved.

But now it’s time to turn to the first talk in our series, When you come together – towards a biblical understanding of church – is our worship biblical?

Why I am writing this book

Church changed quite a lot during the COVID pandemic. Christians around the world were challenged by the restrictions placed upon them imposed by government, and church leaders have been asking if God is trying to show us a better way of ‘doing church’.

This in itself is a challenge, as many older Christians, like myself, have come to love many of the things we used to do, and the older you get, the harder it is to adapt to change. But it’s always appropriate to take a look at the way we do things and ask ourselves if we could do better – or, more importantly, whether what we do is actually what God would want – whether what we are doing is biblical.

This book I’m writing is based on the understanding that God’s will is revealed in his word, the Bible. It’s based on the assumption that in the Bible God has something to say about how we should worship him, and the kind of things we should expect to happen when we gather together in Jesus’ name.

It's not my intention to tell church leaders how they should do things. But I do believe that God’s word teaches us clear principles about what should happen when Christians come together, and it is those principles that I’m seeking to underline and clarify. How they are worked out in practice in any local situation will be for leaders prayerfully to consider.

INTRODUCTION

1 Corinthians 14:26 Some listeners may be surprised to know that the Bible does give us clear guidelines as to what should happen when Christians come together. In I Corinthians 14:26 the apostle Paul writes:

Now from the outset we need to make it clear that when he says, What then shall we say…? Paul is giving them an instruction, not, as some have suggested, a rebuke. This is indicated by his use of the same Greek phrase[1] in verse 15 where he is clearly encouraging the Corinthians to follow his example:

So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.

Indeed, in verse 37 he tells them that the things he is writing to them are the Lord’s command:

If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command.

This strong statement must surely alert the attention of every Bible believing Christian to the fact that God cares very much about what we do when we meet together. If God is worth worshipping at all – and he certainly is – shouldn’t we do all we can to be sure that we’re doing it his way?

So, verse 26 deserves our serious attention. It contains several underlying principles which are, I believe, vital for us to understand and apply to the way we do church, whatever the sociological or cultural situation in which we may find ourselves.

But, before we proceed any further, one further point needs clarifying. What does Paul mean when he says, When you come together? He is undoubtedly referring to the occasions when the Corinthians gathered as a church. This is clear from verse 23:

So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? (cf. in church in verse 19).

Of course, he is not referring to a church building. At the time of writing the epistle (AD 53-54) there were no church buildings, and the Corinthians were almost certainly meeting in the home of one of the members. This means that the numbers in the gathering would inevitably be smaller than those in some churches today. Paul’s teaching can be made to work well in a relatively small church or in a home group, but not so easily in a larger church.

But does this mean that larger churches have nothing to learn from Paul’s teaching in this verse? By no means. The basic principles underlying Paul’s teaching are relevant to all churches, and even larger churches can and should organise smaller gatherings where that teaching can be followed more easily. But we will return to this subject later in the book, after we have considered the implications of the verse in more detail.

The first principle we find in the verse is participation. Everybody is needed. Paul says, every one of you has… Perhaps we need to ask ourselves how many people are really involved in our meetings – or is their involvement limited to joining in the singing or saying Amen to the prayers? This is clearly not what Paul had in mind.

The second principle is variety. In 1 Corinthians 12:13-30 Paul teaches that every member of the body is different from the others, but every member is important. Here in 14:26 that variety is expressed as the members meet together. One may bring a hymn, another a word of instruction, another a revelation, another a tongue, and another an interpretation.

Although these are presumably representative of the many different ways that Christians may contribute to the worship of the church, we see at least three important ingredients that Paul expects in our meetings:

the musical – a hymn
the doctrinal – a word of instruction
the supernatural – a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.

In my experience of Christian worship in over 40 different countries around the world there is no lack of the musical. In many, though by no means all, there is usually adequate scope for the doctrinal. But sadly, in many there is little manifestation of the supernatural. Even some churches that profess to believe in these things make little room for the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit in their meetings.

But it’s clear that Paul expects to see the supernatural in the church. In 1 Corinthians 3:16 he teaches that the gathered church is the temple of the Holy Spirit. In Ephesians 2:21-22 it’s a holy temple in the Lord… a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. And it’s the presence of God’s Spirit among us that makes the miraculous possible every time we meet.

The third key principle is edification. Paul says all these must be done for the strengthening of the church. In chapter 13 he has taught the Corinthians that, whatever gifts we may have, if they are not motivated by love, they are of no value at all. And if we love people we will want to bless them. We want to edify them. That is, to see them built up in their faith. Whatever takes place must be for the strengthening of the church.

So the kind of meeting Paul is envisaging is one where every member has opportunity to contribute something as they are led and empowered by the Holy Spirit. That contribution may come in a rich variety of ways, but whatever it may be, it must be motivated by love and the desire to be a blessing to others.

The three principles we have outlined from 1 Corinthians 14:26, participation, variety, and edification, in many ways summarise Paul’s overall teaching on public worship contained in chapters 12-14. We see the principle of participation in his teaching on the right use of spiritual gifts in chapters 12 and 14.

The principle of variety is vividly illustrated in 12:13-30 where Paul’s theme is unity and diversity, and where he demonstrates our dependence on each other as members of the body of Christ.

And his wonderful teaching on love in chapter 13 leads us into the understanding in chapter 14 that the best way to show love is to put others first by seeking their edification, rather than just seeking a blessing for ourselves.

But underlying these principles is one that is even more important – the leading and power of the Holy Spirit. It’s the Spirit who must enable our participation. It’s the Spirit who brings variety to our meetings. And it’s the Spirit who inspires us with words that will bring edification to the church. In I Corinthians 12:13 Paul refers to the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and we’ll devote a chapter to discussing what it is and its relationship the supernatural gifts of the Spirit.

To consider these themes in more detail, we’ll be exploring chapters 12-14 to gain a fuller understanding of what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 14:26.

As we do so, we’ll discover, among other things, that:

There’s supernatural dimension to the worship of the church expressed in the manifestation of supernatural gifts given by the Holy Spirit (12:1-11).
These all spring from our being baptised in the Spirit (12:13).
The church is the body of Christ, and every member of the body is different and everybody is needed (12:12-30).
Everything we do must be motivated by love (13:1-13).
As an expression of that love, we must always seek to put other people first (14:1-25).
This will mean using correctly the spiritual gifts God has given us by taking responsibility for our actions (14:26-40).
In everything we must submit to the authority of scripture (14:37).

And when we’ve completed our study of these chapters we’ll conclude with a chapter on the role of church leaders in seeking to implement Paul’s teaching in the church today.

Finally, please remember that If there’s anything you’d like me to cover in these talks (and in the book) you can contact me by emailing info@davidpetts.org

[1] ti oun estin. Literally, What is it then?

View Details

Preached live at Brixham Community Church.

View Details

As we embark on a new year, let us allow God to speak to us, however uncomfortable or challenging it may be, and resolve to let saying 'no' to God never be an option.

View Details

Dr David Petts preaching on 'The Humanity and Deity of Jesus'

View Details

Dr David Petts preaches on Living in Victory!

For all podcasts visit https://www.davidpetts.org/podcast

View Details

Victory over the enemy - Lessons from the life of Benaiah

For all podcast episodes visit www.davidpetts.org/podcast

View Details

AMEN!

How often do we say the word, ‘Amen!’?

In this sermon audio, Dr David Petts considers:

It’s meaning and use
The value of saying it
Things we can’t say ‘Amen’ to
The greatest ‘Amen’ of all

View Details

Dr David Petts - Seven reasons for praising the Lord - sermon audio

    Psalm 146  1 Praise the Lord.a]">[a]

Praise the Lord, my soul.

2 I will praise the Lord all my life;
I will sing praise to my God as long as I live.
3 Do not put your trust in princes,
in human beings, who cannot save.
4 When their spirit departs, they return to the ground;
on that very day their plans come to nothing.
5 Blessed are those whose help is the God of Jacob,
whose hope is in the Lord their God.

6 He is the Maker of heaven and earth,
the sea, and everything in them –
he remains faithful for ever.
7 He upholds the cause of the oppressed
and gives food to the hungry.
The Lord sets prisoners free,
8 the Lord gives sight to the blind,
the Lord lifts up those who are bowed down,
the Lord loves the righteous.
9 The Lord watches over the foreigner
and sustains the fatherless and the widow,
but he frustrates the ways of the wicked.

10 The Lord reigns for ever,
your God, O Zion, for all generations.

Praise the Lord.

Footnotes 1. Psalm 146:1 Hebrew Hallelu Yah; also in verse 10

        **New International Version - UK (NIVUK)** Holy Bible, New International Version® Anglicized, NIV® Copyright © 1979, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.®

View Details

How God speaks to us Talk 22 Responding to God’s Voice (Part 2)

Receiving and using spiritual gifts 1 Corinthians 12:11 tells us that it’s the Holy Spirit himself who determines what gifts he should give us. But that does not mean that we cannot put ourselves in a position where we are most likely to receive them. As we draw this series to a conclusion, let me share with you five keys to receiving and using them. They are relevant, not only to spiritual gifts, but also to the whole question of letting God speak to us and through us.

Desire them eagerly

In 1 Corinthians 14:1 we are told to eagerly desire spiritual gifts. The Greek verb here is zeloō. Paul uses it three times in connection with spiritual gifts. Here, and in 1 Corinthians 12:31 where he encourages the Corinthians to eagerly desire the greater gifts by which he probably means those that are of the greatest value in building up the church. See 14:12 where he uses it again.

The verb is a really strong word – the KJV translates it covet earnestly – and is the origin of our English word zeal. You may remember that one of Jesus’ disciples was called Simon the Zealot (Matthew 10:4). The Zealots were a fanatical political group who were determined to overthrow the power of the Romans, no matter the cost. I mention this simply to emphasise the strength of the word that Paul uses to indicate what should be our attitude to spiritual gifts.

So, our starting point, if we want to be used in spiritual gifts, is to ask ourselves how eagerly we desire them. Then, the next step will be to stop making excuses.

Stop making excuses

I’m mentioning this because it’s amazing how easy it seems to be to make excuses for not doing the things we know we ought to do. Now I’m not suggesting that every listener will be making all these excuses, and it may be that you’re making none of them. But I know from experience that the things I’m going to mention are common causes of Christians not entering into some of the wonderful blessings God has in store for them.

Excuse Number 1 I’m not worthy

The first excuse is quite understandable. In fact, it sounds very spiritual. We know it’s wrong to boast, and surely, to say I’m not worthy is showing humility? But God doesn’t give us these gifts because we deserve them. They come from his grace. That’s why Paul calls them charismata (1 Corinthians 12:4) which comes from the word charis meaning grace.

In fact, everything God gives us comes from his grace. Even the gift of eternal life is a charisma. In Romans 6:23 Paul says that the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. And the word for gift here is charisma. We don’t receive eternal life because we deserve it, but because of God’s grace.

And the same is true of spiritual gifts. We receive them despite our unworthiness, or to put it another way, because we have already been made worthy in Christ. The Corinthians are a clear example of this principle. They were not lacking in spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 1:7), but this was certainly not because they were particularly good Christians[1]. So we should not hold back from seeking spiritual gifts for ourselves because we are conscious of our own shortcomings.

Excuse Number 2 I’m not suitable

This covers a range of excuses – I’m not talented enough, old enough, clever enough, and so on. It’s here that another word Paul uses can help us. In 1 Corinthians 12:1 he refers to the gifts he’s about to talk about as pneumatika. The basic meaning of this word is spiritual, but in the context it’s probably better understood to mean supernatural.

As we’ve said, all God’s gifts come from his grace, so they’re all charismata. There are natural gifts and supernatural gifts[2]. Paul refers to the gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 as pneumatika because these particular gifts are supernatural. That means that there’s no limit as to the persons God may give them to. They have nothing to do with our natural talents. And they’re available to all God’s people, irrespective of age, gender, or social status (Acts 2:17ff).

Excuse Number 3 They’re beyond my reach

Sometimes we’re tempted to think that the wonderful gifts we’re talking about are somehow beyond our reach. We’re conscious of our own humanity and spiritual gifts are manifestations of the supernatural power that comes from God himself. God is in heaven and we are on earth. Surely they’re beyond our reach? But no, they are not. Spiritual gifts do not come from God in outer space! They come from God who lives inside you.

This is where another word Paul uses to describe these gifts will help us. In 1 Corinthians 12:7 he refers to them as a manifestation. The Greek word is phanerosis (v7). It comes from a verb meaning to shine and has been defined as a clear display, an outward evidencing of a latent principle.

To understand this better, please think about a lightbulb. Electricity is the power at work inside it. The light that shines from it is the evidence that the electricity is there. It’s a manifestation of the power within. Now think of yourself as the lightbulb, and the Holy Spirit as the power at work inside you, and spiritual gifts as the outward evidence of that power.

It's the Holy Spirit who gives these gifts and he lives inside you. He can manifest through you any gift he chooses. In verse 6 Paul also calls them energemata, which literally means things worked inside. This means that potentially any of the gifts could be at work in you, because the Giver is already there! But, following our analogy of the lightbulb, it’s our responsibility to keep the electricity flowing if the light is to shine. We need to keep filled with the Spirit and the gifts will come.

Keep filled with the Spirit

In Ephesians 5:18 we’re told to be filled with the Spirit. As we saw in an earlier talk, we can best understand what Paul means by this by looking in Acts at the descriptions given there of people being filled with the Spirit. These examples paint a clear picture for us of what Paul means when he tells us to be filled with the Spirit.

We learn from Acts that it’s a supernatural experience that is received suddenly rather than gradually and is accompanied by miraculous gifts that greatly empower our witness for Christ. Jesus’ first disciples began to exercise the gifts of the Spirit when they were first filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost and began to speak in tongues (Acts 2:4)[3]. And if we want to be used in spiritual gifts it’s clear that we too need to be filled with the Spirit.

Now the fact that Paul tells us to be filled with the Spirit implies that there is something we can do about it. God’s Spirit is always available to us, but it’s our responsibility to be filled. In 2 Timothy 1:6-8 Paul says to Timothy:

For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline. So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord…

There can be no doubt that the ‘spirit’ referred to in these verses is the Holy Spirit. It’s the Holy Spirit who gives us power and produces in us fruit like love and self-discipline. He also enables us to testify about the Lord (cf. Acts 1:8). So the gift of God that Timothy received through the laying on of Paul’s hands was the gift of the Holy Spirit[4].

But what does Paul mean when he tells Timothy to fan this gift into flame? The Greek word here is anazopureo. It literally mean give life again to the fire. We have the fire of God’s Spirit within us, but it’s our responsibility to keep it burning. Or, following the analogy we gave earlier, to keep the electricity flowing. And to do that, we need to pray, not only with our mind but also with our spirit, but that’s a subject for our next section.

Pray

Talking about spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 14:12-15, Paul says this:

12 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church.

13 For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.

14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.

In verse 12 Paul acknowledges that the Corinthians are eager to have spiritual gifts, but he wants them to concentrate on gifts that build up the church. He is emphasising something he’s already said in verses 1-5 where he makes it clear that prophecy is more valuable for the church than speaking in tongues. Tongues are useful for personal edification (v4), but prophecy will edify the church. However, tongues can be a means of edifying the church, but only if it’s accompanied by the gift of interpretation (v5).

So, in verse 13 he says that anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they are saying. That way the church will be edified as well as the person speaking in tongues. And, apart from anything else, this verse shows us that, if we’re eagerly desiring a spiritual gift (v12), we should pray for it.

Paul then goes on in verses 14-15 to tell us something very important about speaking in tongues. Although, as we’ve seen, it’s of no value to the church unless it’s interpreted, it’s of great value to the individual Christian. He says that when he pray in tongues we are praying with the spirit. This is different from praying with the mind which is what we do when we pray in English (or any other language we have learned).

So if we pray in tongues we are praying with our spirit. This is not a reference to the Holy Spirit, although of course it’s the Holy Spirit who enables us to speak in tongues. When I pray in English, I understand what I’m saying, but when I pray I tongues I do not. But, even so, Paul says it edifies me (v4).

So, Paul says in verse 15:

What shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, I will also pray with my mind.

This clearly shows his determination to do both. And if we are to fan into flame the gift of the Spirit, we need to too. Like Jackie Pullinger, who testifies that speaking in tongues for fifteen minutes a day has resulted in her seeing amazing miracles among drug addicts in Hong Kong, spiritual gifts will happen in our lives as we fan into flame the gift of the Spirit within us. We need to keep filled with the Spirit by praying with our spirit (in tongues) and praying with our understanding (in English) specifically asking for spiritual gifts, as Paul encourages the Corinthians in verse 13, for example.

But how do I know what to pray for? Aren’t the gifts distributed as the Holy Spirit determines? And what if I start asking for a gift that it’s not his will for me to have? These are the kind of questions my students often asked me, and I quite understand why. But the problem is, if we don’t know what to pray for, we probably won’t pray for any of them.

As I was thinking and praying about the best way to answer these questions, I felt the Lord say to me,

Tell them to pray for whatever gift they like. I’m delighted they’re praying for any of the gifts. I will direct them as they continue to pray.

I quickly saw the Lord’s wisdom in giving that advice. All God’s gifts are good, and it’s good to pray for any of them. But if the gift we’re asking for is not for us, the Lord will move us towards the ones that are. As we said in an earlier talk, God usually guides us when we’re on the move. Remember the illustration of the SATNAV?

It's also helpful to remember that, when we don’t know what to pray for as we pray with our mind (in English), if we pray with our spirit (in tongues), not understanding what we are saying, the words we speak in tongues may well be voicing a request for the very gifts God is planning to give us.

Act in faith

So, if we’re eagerly desiring for God not only to speak to us, but also to speak through us, if we’ve stopped making excuses, if we’re keeping filled with the Spirit, and if we’re praying that God will give us these wonderful gifts, all we need to do now is act in faith.

Jesus himself said that gifts like tongues, healings and miracles would accompany those who believe (Mark 16:17-18), and the apostle Paul tells us that those who prophesy should do so in accordance with their faith (Romans 12:6). And James tells us that faith without works is dead (James 2:17). We have to do something. If we want God to speak through us, we have to speak.

An example of this is how I began to exercise the gift of interpreting tongues, which I’ve already told you about in an earlier talk. I acted in faith, despite my doubts. Nelson Mandela once said:

I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it. The brave man is not the one who does not feel afraid, but he who conquers that fear.

Similarly, faith is not the absence of doubt. It’s overcoming your doubts by trusting the Lord. He doesn’t give stones or scorpions or snakes when we ask for the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:11-13) or when we ask for his gifts (Matthew 7:9-11). Trusting in these promises, we can act in faith, knowing that God will not let us down.

If you’ve enjoyed this series, you’ll want to get a copy of my new book,

The Voice of God – how he speaks to us today

Available from my website: www.davidpetts.org

228 pages containing all the teaching in the podcasts, and more.

£12.00 per copy (including postage)

[1] See 1 Corinthians 3:3, 5:1-12, 11:21.

[2] Natural gifts include hospitality, marriage, celibacy etc. For a more detailed discussion on this, please see Body Builders – gifts to make God’s people grow

[3] For more on what it means to be filled with the Spirit, please see

A New Dimension – How to be filled with the Holy Spirit

[4] Compare Acts 8:17, 19:6

View Details

How God speaks to us Talk 21 Responding to God’s Voice (Part 1)

This series has been about how God speaks to us. In our last talk we were considering how to hear him. In this talk and the next – apologies for saying last time that this would be the last talk – we’ll be talking about how we should respond. It’s a wonderful privilege to know that the Creator of the universe has spoken to you, and our initial response may well be a mixture of surprise, disbelief, awe, excitement, gratitude, and worship. But after this initial reaction, two other things are absolutely vital. We must believe what God has said and do what he has said.

I mentioned disbelief as part of what might well be our initial reaction, because this was certainly the experience of many of the Bible characters God spoke to – Moses, Gideon, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, for example. So, an initial reaction of disbelief, often caused by a very real sense of unworthiness or inadequacy, is quite understandable. But, if we are to do what God says, we must put disbelief behind us and trust that God knows what he’s doing! We really have no excuse. Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17) and if God has spoken to us, it’s our responsibility to believe it.

But, of course, believing is only the starting point. We must not only believe what God has said to us, we must do it. Four times in the Bible we read:

Today if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts[1]**

which in the context relates to disobedience. If God has spoken to us we should not postpone our obedience to his voice. We should believe it and obey it today.

Of course, the specifics of what God says will be different for every one of us, but the things that God has said in his word he says to us all. And one of the great principles I see in Scripture is that God not only speaks TO us, but he also wants to speak THROUGH us. In earlier talks we showed how God can speak to us through spiritual gifts like prophecy, tongues and interpretation. And, of course, we could have also mentioned other gifts like words of wisdom and words of knowledge. But God can also speak through us by these miraculous gifts.

We said earlier that there’s a sense in which all God’s people are ‘prophets’. This doesn’t mean that we’re all prophets in the Ephesiams 4:11 sense (i.e. like Agabus), or that we all have the spiritual gift of prophecy, but we are all called to speak for God in one way or another. The Old Testament prophets spoke to God’s people, Israel. They also spoke to the heathen nations around them. In a similar way, as God’s people today, we Christians are called to speak on behalf of God, not only to our fellow Christians, but also to those around us who do not yet know Jesus. And through the infilling of the Holy Spirit we can receive gifts that will empower us to do that. In fact, without the Holy Spirit’s help, we are powerless. And that’s why I’m going to conclude this series by explaining:

The value of spiritual gifts in encouraging other Christians
The value of spiritual gifts in evangelism
How to receive spiritual gifts (Talk 22)

The value of spiritual gifts in encouraging other Christians In 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 Paul lists nine supernatural gifts that are given to Christians as the Holy Spirit determines (v11). In the following verses, using the human body as an illustration of the church and the parts of the body as its members, Paul makes it clear that, though we all have different gifts, we’re all needed if the body, the church, is to function properly.

Within the context of the church, the value of these gifts is determined by the extent to which they edify and encourage the members. They are given for the common good (1 Corinthians 12:7). And in 1 Corinthians 14:5 Paul says that the person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless they interpret, so that the church may be edified. Similarly, in Romans 1:11 we read that Paul longed to see the Romans so that he might impart some spiritual gift to make them strong (Romans 1:11).

Now in 1 Corinthians 13 Paul makes it clear that, whatever gifts God may give us, they are useless unless our motive is love. He goes on in chapter 14 to emphasise that everything we do as we gather together in church must be for the edification of our fellow Christians (v26). Quite simply, if we really love people, we will want to bless them, and perhaps the best way to do that is to prophesy – to let God speak to them through us. That’s why Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:1:

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire the gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy.

How glad I am for the people who allowed God to speak through them in this way that have proved such a blessing to me over the years. This has usually happened during the course of a service at church, but sometimes it happens privately. In June 2016, totally unexpectedly, Eileen suffered a severe stroke which totally paralysed the right-hand side of her body. Although she made some improvement over the first few months, despite much prayer, six years later she is still unable to walk, and, after the many miracles of healing we have seen, we naturally were asking, Where is God in all this? Why has she not been healed?

The answer came through our good friend Barrie Taylor. Barrie and Sandra are the parents of Richard, our daughter Sarah’s husband. We only see them about twice a year as they live at quite some distance from us. On one occasion, after a pleasant lunch in a restaurant near our home, Barrie said, Today I asked the Lord to give me a word for you, and he gave me this:

My Father is at work in your lives and situation, which he is using as a platform to display his sustaining grace.

It was just what we needed. Despite appearances, God was and is at work in our lives, and although we would love the Lord to heal Eileen – and I still pray that he will – we see regular evidence of his hand at work in ways that would not have been possible if she were fit and well. Each week we have some twenty different carers come into our home and with many of them we have had great opportunities to share the gospel.

But that leads us to the next reason why we should ask the Lord to speak through us prophetically. When we do so, it is not only of great value in encouraging our fellow Christians. It is also a vital component of our telling others about Jesus. And, as we shall see, the message of the gospel is best proclaimed, not only with words given to us by the Spirit, but also by miraculous deeds performed by his power.

The value of spiritual gifts in evangelism Once we have heard and received the good news about Jesus, it’s both our privilege and our responsibility to share that good news with others. In John 3:36 Jesus himself gives this warning:

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

It’s our privilege to spread the good news that by believing in Jesus we can have eternal life, but it’s our serious responsibility to warn people of the dangers of rejecting him. Paul took this responsibility so seriously that he could say in Acts 20:26-27 that he was innocent of the blood of all men because he had not hesitated to proclaim… the whole will of God.

To use words like these, Paul must have felt his responsibility very strongly. No doubt he had in mind what God had said to Ezekiel when he told him that if he did not warn people of the danger they were in he would hold him accountable for their blood (i.e. their lives)[2]. And it’s surely right that we should take our responsibility just as seriously. If someone is lost, don’t we need to show them the way? If someone is in danger, don’t we need to warn them?

If we genuinely feel that sense of moral responsibility, we will surely want all the help we can get from God to enable us fulfil it. And once we realise that powerful spiritual gifts are available to assist us in this vital task of evangelism, we will surely want to know how to receive them and use them.

The value of spiritual gifts in evangelism is demonstrated very clearly in the Book of Acts. In Acts 2:41 we’re told that about 3000 people became Christians in a single day. This was in response to Peter’s preaching, but what had brought such a great crowd under the sound of the gospel was the miraculous gift of tongues (vv4-6).

In Acts 4:4 the number had grown to about 5000, which was the result of the healing of the man who had been lame from birth (Acts 3). In Acts 8:6 we’re told that crowds of people in Samaria paid close attention to what Philip said when they saw the miracles he performed, and as a result believed the gospel message and were baptised (v12).

Events like these were a direct fulfilment of Jesus’ promise in Mark 16:15-20 where we read:

He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up Iinto heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.**

Here Jesus promises that we can expect spiritual gifts like speaking in tongues, healing, and miracles to accompany the preaching of the gospel. The Christians in the early church recognised this when they prayed in Acts 4:29-31 that God would stretch out his hand to heal and that signs and wonders might be done in the name of Jesus so that God’s servants might speak his word with boldness.

And in Romans 15:18-19 Paul could speak of what Christ had accomplished through him in leading the Gentiles to obey God, by what he had said and done

by the power of signs and miracles through the power of the Spirit,,, So from Jerusalem all the way round to Illyricum I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ

which suggests that the gospel is not ‘fully proclaimed’ unless it is attested by signs from heaven.

Illustrations from WFP Burton, Reinhard Bonnke, Aimé Cizeron.

And although the New Testament largely records miracles that were performed by apostles like Peter and Paul, we should not assume that it’s only apostles who can expect to see miracles confirming the word. In the passage we’ve already quoted, Jesus said,

These signs will accompany those who believe** (Mark 16:17).

As believers we are all expected to spread the gospel and we can all expect the Lord to work with us in some way, backing up what we say. As we allow the Lord to speak through us as we tell others about Jesus, we can expect him to work with us confirming the word through whatever spiritual gifts he chooses to give us.

Next time: How to receive spiritual gifts

IF YOU’VE BEEN ENJOYING THIS SERIES, PLEASE LOOK OUT FOR MY NEW BOOK ON THE SUBJECT: The Voice of God – How he speaks to us today

I hope to make it available before Christmas. Check my website for details:

www.davidpetts.org

[1] Psalm 95:8, Hebrews 3:8, 15; 4:7.

[2]Ezekiel 3:17-19, cf. 33:2, 6-7

View Details

How God speaks to us Talk 21 Responding to God’s Voice (Part 1)

But, of course, believing is only the starting point. We must not only believe what God has said to us, we must do it. Four times in the Bible we read:

Today if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts[1]**

which in the context relates to disobedience. If God has spoken to us we should not postpone our obedience to his voice. We should believe it and obey it today.

The value of spiritual gifts in encouraging other Christians
The value of spiritual gifts in evangelism
How to receive spiritual gifts (Talk 22)