Welcome

The Gospel of Frank? This is not one of those little-known Gnostic Gospels. It was not found buried in a tomb, or translated from some monolith in Jerusalem. There will be no conspiracies about how Jesus was actually born in Alaska, or that his disciples were alcoholics. The Gospel of Frank is a forum where people are encouraged to talk openly and honestly about the Christian faith. Be Frank. That's the plan. I promise I won't be offended by your questions or comments. Please don't be offended by mine. I may sound facetious or sarcastic at times, but my intention is to generate thoughts and challenge ideas. Sometimes I'm just trying to be funny. Why not take our faith to an intellectual target range and pelt it with every weapon we have? If it’s still standing at the end, we definitely have something worth defending. If it falls or ends up full of holes and dents, we should re-examine it. Ultimately, I want to share some of the eye-opening, jaw-dropping, life-changing things that I believe the Holy Spirit has shown me. I want to challenge Christians to think clearly about their faith so they can speak with their friends and co-workers in a way that is clear and comprehensive. I want Christians to feel confident in what they believe and know exactly how to move forward. I will keep this Welcome blog on top, but the rest are listed from newest to oldest. If you are new to the site and want to follow the progression of thought, just scroll to the bottom and work your way up. Be sure to leave to comments and participate in the polls. We want to hear from you. Let's watch Faith and Frank get married.

Tyrant or Pushover?

It seems honorable and scriptural and logical and natural to attribute all things to the sovereign will of God. How can any created thing exert authority over its creator? How can anything in this world happen beyond His knowledge or allowance or impetus? And if we have any doubt of that, there are plenty of verses to support these assertions. However, at the same time that we affirm God's rightful place on His throne, we often act and feel otherwise, as if, despite his omnipotence and omnipresence, He could use some human or angelic help from time to time. We hold prayer vigils, as if the quantity or fervency of our prayers can change God's mind or twist His arm. Does the arm of God need twisting? Does God need to be informed? We talk of a spiritual battle, but how can there be a battle if everything happens according to plan? If nothing happens beyond God's will, Satan and his demons are servants of that will, as are our sinful actions. All things, seemingly good or evil, work together for God's ultimate purpose. But if that is true, should we feel sorry for our sins? Should we ask forgiveness, as if our actions could be independent and contrary to His will? And if our actions are truly free, how can God be truly sovereign? Take it one step further. If we are free to sin, then my neighbor is also free to sin, which means he can come over to my house and murder my children in their beds, and maybe God won't stop him. Does God intervene in the free actions of men? Does he have a sliding scale for when He intervenes and when He doesn't? Would He allow me to lie and steal, but not murder? That's a lot of questions and conjecture. This is an issue over which the church has splintered, an issue that informs our perceptions of the character and power of God. Therefore it is an important issue, which is why we have these conversations. Let me offer a few thoughts and I will be eager to hear yours. The use of sovereignty is up to the sovereign. God has demonstrated that He can do what He wants when He wants and how He wants. He has ultimate authority over His creation. His sovereignty, however, is bound by His character. A selfish sovereign may create lesser beings to live for nothing but to ingratiate his ego. He would create servants to do his bidding, He would create an enemy with no hope of victory, and He would demand worship and confessions from fragile, error-prone beings. A selfish sovereign would control everything, allowing no true freedom to his subjects for fear of sharing glory. It would be like a man who wanted to be a successful filmmaker, so he built an army of robots to watch his film, applaud, and give rave reviews. He also programed some negative critics whom he could scold and dismantle later. Win. Win. An apathetic sovereign might create something, then become distracted and leave the creation to itself. We could have a sovereign God and also have evolution. A loving sovereign would create free creatures, both spiritual and physical, in order to have genuine relationships with them. That would allow for true rebellion, but also for true redemption. Of course this God can intervene if absolutely necessary (harden hearts, bend wills, send prophets), but generally allow men and spirits to make their own choices and deal with the consequences. There are drawbacks to such a system---senseless deaths, abuse, insanity, corrupt governments, unspeakable atrocities---but also great advantages. Is freedom worth the price we pay? Or is freedom an illusion?

Don't Fool Yourself

There was a time when I was obsessed with learning how to walk by the Spirit. If I felt a compulsion or heard a voice in my head, I would analyze it, trying to determine if it was God, a lack of sleep, guilt, or something genetic at work. I didn't trust myself. And I didn't trust anyone else. This was my personal challenge: If the Holy Spirit was removed from my life, how much of it would have to change. Without Him, I could still read my Bible. I could still pray. I could still have fellowship with believers. I could still listen to pastors and teachers. I could still serve my community. I realized that there was very little, if anything, in my Christianity that required an indwelling Holy Spirit. Apparently, the deposit Jesus left that would "lead me into all truth" was fairly inconsequential. As I continued to explore my need for God's Spirit, I came across certain barriers in my quest for "absolute truth," only one of which I will mention here. Perhaps you can think of others. I call it "God Talk." I saw it a lot in college: "I was so tired last night, but I knew I had to finish my paper, so I prayed and just kept typing and the Lord got me through it." But what about the millions of other students that accomplished the same thing with a lot of coffee and face slapping? Parents? "I needed sleep, but the kids were sniffing and calling for me all night so I gave them a little Benadryl and, thank God, they slept through the night." But John . . . we are encouraged to "acknowledge Him in all our ways," right? We should be giving glory to Him for everything that happens in our lives, for better or for worse. But what if it isn't Him? I guess we could argue that everything is from Him because we are His children and He loves us, and He will never leave us. If we hold that perspective, we will probably find ourselves saying things like "God is trying to teach me patience" when we are feeling impatient, or "God is good," once we've had our morning coffee, or "God is testing me" when things are not going well. Sometimes that might be true. Other times not. Does it matter to you? The Greeks attributed every natural event to the activity of their gods. But those gods were not real. Our God is. How often do we treat God like one of these Greek gods? Does it give us a sense of security to attribute everything in our lives to Him? Or should we? What if God is not responsible for keeping you awake while you write your paper? What if God did not put your children to sleep because he knew you needed it? What if God did not open up that parking spot at the last second because he knew you were in a time crunch? Maybe it just opened up like it did for that Buddhist in the car in front of you, or that Agnostic in the red Jeep. How do you feel about "God Talk"?

Dismembered?

I worked at a Presbyterian church for seven years. About halfway through my time there, the pastor took me to dinner and explained that the elder board was bothered by the fact that my wife and I had never shown an interest in becoming members. Becoming a member of a church never sat well with me, though I was never forced to voice my misgivings until faced with the direct question from my pastor. I answered something like this: "I am already a member of Christ's body, which means that I am already committed to this church and every other church that believes and calls Him Lord. What benefit would it be to go to classes and take vows of commitment to a specific faction of that body? This is not like marriage. I may be called to move to another church. I may not agree to all of the Presbyterian creeds, and even if I did, what if, in time, I came to believe something different than I vowed to believe? Would I have to retract my vows?" When I asked him why membership was so important, his answer was something like this: "It makes the commitment more palpable to the congregation. They feel more devoted to the ministry and mission of the church. They are more willing to serve. They are more willing to tithe regularly. It is not as easy for them to just leave." I understood his point, but in the back of my mind I was thinking that church membership is not like baptism or communion---scriptural mandates---but something that gives the leadership an idea of who they can depend on for tithing and service. It helps to give an individual church stability. That all seems good from a practical standpoint, but what about from a spiritual standpoint? Do we see the church as a spiritual organism, a body of millions connected to a single head (Christ) through a central nervous system (the Holy Spirit). Or are we divided into self-sustaining service organizations of like-mindedness (churches of various denominations)? Or both? How do you feel about this?

Ignorance honors God?

Questions are in vogue. They make us feel humble and submissive. We are seeking, asking, knocking. We are on our knees. But answers can make us seem arrogant. They have the potential to splinter us into even more denominations. And what if we're wrong . . . ? How can a man ever comprehend God? If we could somehow wrap our mind around him, wouldn't that belittle him? I would much rather just sit in the wonder of him, saturating in the mystery, absorbing each subtle thrill of curiosity and awe. Isn't that what worship is? But God created humans with spirits specifically that we might know him. Imagine me connecting with my wife the way we tend to connect with God: "Laurie, you are a woman. I could never comprehend you (there is some truth to that). Just let me catch a glimpse of your beauty. Just let me feel your presence next to me on the couch. I don't expect you to speak to me, you have already written letters to me in the past. But if you do, I will write your words in a diary and treasure them. Your body is made up of so many complex systems---internal organs, muscles, tendons, and molecules---I could never understand you fully. I just want to bask here in your glory. I just want to imagine the day I'll really be able to know you . . ." Now I realize that Laurie and I are both humans, and God and man are different, but I believe that God created man that he might have fellowship with him just as fully as Jesus had fellowship with his disciples. Yes, it means that we have to learn how to connect with him in more subtle ways than speech and facial expressions. But those means are fully available to everyone who has been made alive in Christ. I don't have to understand God's omnipresence to know that he is with me. I don't have to understand God's omnipotence to rest safely in him. I don't have to understand God's love to embrace it. Should my children keep me at an "honorable" arms-length because they don't know how to drive a car or pay the mortgage? Should I keep Laurie at an "honorable" arms-length because we have different anatomies? If God gave his people a Holy Spirit to "guide them into all truth," why do we keep God at an "honorable" arms-length and generally resort to knowing him through Bible study, our pastors, and our brains? Obviously, I am generalizing here, which is dangerous. There are many Christians that have vibrant relationships with God. But I'm thinking about the general trends of our Church today. The fact that we have so many questions and so few answers is a sad testament to our times. It is like a body that was so enamored with the mystery of the brain that it rejected the nervous system, preferring the humility of paralysis to the arrogance of life and function. Do you agree? Disagree? What do you see happening in the church?

Back From the Dead - Part 2

Life and Death are consistent themes from Genesis to Revelation. In fact, the most central events of the Bible--the Fall of Adam and the Fix of Jesus--are focused primarily on life and death.

a

God told Adam and Eve that the day they eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil they would die. The serpent insists otherwise. Did they die on that day?

a

No. And yes. I guess it depends on how you define "death."

a

Death, in essense, is the separation of a life source and a host. In physical death, it is the separation of body and spirit. In spiritual death, it is the separation of the spirit of man with the Spirit of God. These deaths are not always eternal.

a

Think of death as turning off a light. You flip the switch and the electricity is separated from the light bulb. Death. Darkness. Turn it on and the connection is re-established. The bulb comes to life. Illumination.

a

Often it is the context, not the original language, that gives insight into which death and life is being referred to. For example: The wages of sin is death . . .

a

From one perspective, you could see that verse as a warning to sinners that their lifestyle is foolish and will ultimately result in their physical deaths. From another perspective you could say that sin is what separates God and man, creating spiritual death. Many Christians choose to include both answers, saying that spiritual death ultimately results in physical corruption and death, though I think that most of the evidence for this view is based in many Christians bobbing their heads in unison rather than Scripture itself.

a

However, if you go on, you must match this "death" with the ensuing "life": . . . but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.

a

So was Jesus coming to give physical life? Of course not. The people were already alive. What about corruption and eventual death? Did Christians start to look healthier than pagans? Did they start to live noticeably longer? If the wages of sin has something to do with our physical bodies, then the gift of Jesus would also have to affect our physical bodies. That's simple logic. Otherwise the sin of Adam is more powerful and pervasive than the salvation of Jesus.

a

But although we do see a change in our spirits at salvation, we do not necessarily see a change in our physical bodies, therefore we must assume that the wages of sin is spiritual death--a separation from God.

a

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned. Romans 5:12

a

For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. Romans 5:17 a

"I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep." John 10:10-11 (both spiritual and physical life mentioned back to back)

So Adam's sin brought a curse to all men. The curse was death. And what is man going to do when separated from God's Spirit? Miss the mark. Every day. All day. Sin is the only option. a Jesus came to reconnect God and man, to put the spiritual nervous system back between the body and the head in order to make righteousness an option. And what did he do to bring us from spiritual death to spiritual life? He physically died and rose again. a More to come . . . a Thoughts?

Back From the Dead - Part 1

It seemed fitting to resurrect Frank with the topic of resurrection. Unfortunately, after Frank finished a hellish few months of work, he took Spring Break too seriously to come out with a post on or around Easter Sunday. He apologizes. But after being dead for so long . . . well, you wouldn't understand. Christians get so excited on Resurrection Sunday. Jesus leaves the tomb alive and well, having conquered sin and death. The salvation work is finished. The pastor of my church (and I suspect many others) went into a lot of detail about how the resurrection must be historical fact, how Jesus is alive and well today, but . . . will you excuse me a moment as I stick on my cynic hat? If my Christian grandmother dies, I wouldn't say that Death has had its way with her. I wouldn't consider her really dead just because she didn't crawl back out of the coffin and ascend bodily into heaven. People actually celebrate at Christian funerals, assured that their loved ones are safe and sound, alive in heaven. So Jesus comes back bodily from the grave, walks around for a few weeks, then goes straight to the place he would have gone anyway. Where is the victory there? It seems more like a delay, a farewell tour, a victory lap . . . but not necessary for salvation. I grew up believing that it was the death of Jesus that made salvation possible. There were scriptures that led me to believe that sin was plastered in or on Jesus (as if it was some sort of black goo) while he was on the cross, forcing God to turn his face (as if he doesn't look on sinful people every day). Then, when the Romans crucified Jesus, sin was crucified with him. But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. Romans 7:16-17 He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. I Peter 2:24 But what is sin? Missing the mark, right? How can you kill "missing the mark"? Shoot it? Stab it?If sin is not physical or material, how can it be killed? Secondly, how could it dwell within a body? Another thing: Paul seems to think that the salvation work is incomplete without the resurrection, which means the work was not completed on the cross. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. I Cor 15:16-17 Since the death and resurrection is central to our life and hope, shouldn't we understand it completely? I grilled the Christians in my 10th Grade Bible class on this, and not one of them could logically explain how the death and resurrection of Jesus saved anyone. Can any of you answer these questions? (remember, I still have my cynic hat on) 1) If Jesus was forgiving sins before the cross (he claimed that authority) then why couldn't he have just forgiven everyone without going to the cross? Was his authority limited? 2) If Jesus conquered sin and death, why do we still sin and die? 3) Why was the resurrection necessary for the salvation of sins? 4) Why was a physical resurrection necessary?

Literally?

The Bible cannot always be taken literally. While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat. This is My body." Matt 26:26 Weird. But . . . I guess it must be. I mean, Jesus doesn't lie, right? Apparently cannibalism is one of the great sacraments of Christianity. . . . all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ. I Cor 10:3-4 So when the devil wanted to turn rocks into break, he was talking to the right guy. Since Jesus was a rock and his body is bread, it makes sense. This also explains why Jesus took so long to come save the Jews. He was a rock. How often did literal thinking confuse the people around Jesus? Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews then said, "It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?" And Jesus said to them, "Watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees." They began to discuss this among themselves, saying, "He said that because we did not bring any bread." Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born, can he?" These seem like ridiculous scenarios. How could these people be so dense? But at the same time, how can we be sure that we're not making the same mistake? Most of us imagine hell as a place of utter darkness with a lake of fire in the center. Wait? Fire and darkness? Somehow our minds accept the contradiction. After all, the Bible is God's Word. Hey, maybe the flames are invisible. Or maybe there is meaning in darkness and fire, meaning than can help our physical minds to somehow grasp a spiritual place. Like a blind man getting a sense of blue by holding a piece of ice. Same applies to heaven. Lions and lambs? Streets of gold? No symbolic language there. What about prophecy? How many Jews rejected Jesus based on their literal interpretation of prophecy? Jesus did not ascend to the throne of David, therefore he was not the Messiah. What about the Parable of the Talents? For some reason all parables are understood to be physical things describing spiritual things--seeds, leaven, pearl, treasure--but in this particular case, Jesus is actually talking about money, right? In this one case. Right? Or, wait! He means our . . . talents. Christians, what is the great and valuable gift that God has given to us through Christ? Money? The ability to play piano? This may seem valuable to me, but I'm not the one telling the parable. What is valuable to Christ is the very thing he came to give--LIFE. The Holy Spirit. And that Spirit is to bear fruit, not just sit dormant in our spirits until Christ returns. Why do we twist these parables into pocket-sized, practical life lessons? The people had Solomon for that. Jesus didn't work at OSH. Bottom line: God sees the world from a Creator's perspective. Often he speaks in symbols, types, and shadows to explain things that would be difficult for physical creatures to understand. If we don't want to sound like the Pharisees, the Disciples, or Nicodemus we need to begin to understand that perspective.

New Direction

This next subject matter runs the risk of attracting spiderwebs and dust to this blog, but I'm willing to take the risk. I have learned that in Christian circles the most action comes from taking prayer requests. A close second, though more dangerous, is to bring up something controversial, like predestination, homosexuality, or speaking in tongues, though it's important to steer away from any solid answers. Third, talk about something obscure like the Nephilim or the mysterious undeaths of Enoch, Elijah, and Moses. That always helps to keep the eyelids from sagging. Why are we so easily bored? Maybe it's because everything seems to gravitate around something we've already heard a billion times. We know that Jesus died for our sins, we're on our way to heaven, we're doing our daily devotions, avoiding sin as much as possible, and now we just want a little support. Since we have to meet every week, it also might be fun to find interesting or controversial tidbits from the Bible to keep us talking, though we're not always sure what good it will do on a practical level. Back to prayer requests. The subject I want to bring up doesn't often come from the pulpit, but to ignore it would be to ignore the very thing that, for me, has shed a great deal of light on the Scriptures and has erased any doubts I have of the existence, character, and work of God. In fact, when the Holy Spirit began to teach me, this is where He started. The concept was presented to me while I was at Bible school back in '98. Every student was required to read through the Old Testament, so I cheerfully read through books like Genesis and Exodus, and dutifully pushed through books like Leviticus and I Chronicles. As I was chewing through the log of mid Ezekiel, I came across a passage that stuck in my brain like a splinter. In chapter 40, the prophet has a vision of an angelic man who takes him through the temple with a measuring rod and proceeds to measure every single item in great detail. Every single item. After several chapters of mind-numbing geometry, the man said something that struck me as odd: "As for you, son of man, describe the temple to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities; and let them measure the plan. If they are ashamed of all that they have done, make known to them the design of the house, its structure, its exits, its entrances, all its designs, all its statutes, and all its laws and write it in their sight, so that they may observe its whole design and all its statutes and do them." If they are ashamed of their sin, tell them . . . about a building? Be sure to mention that the width of the entrance gate is ten cubits and the length is thirteen cubits. Also, don’t forget, the porch of the gate is eight cubits and the side pillars are two. How could these numbers do anything for the sin of the Jews? I thought about this for a long time before coming to an interesting conclusion. Before I could understand the meaning of a created object, I had to understand the perspective and intention of the creator. In other words, God designed the temple with more than practical uses in mind. There is also symbolic meaning, and the symbols should be enough to expose our sin and show us how to deal with it. A look at Hebrews 8:4-5 only reinforces this concept: Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law, who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle, for, "See," He says, "that you make all things according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain." Copy and shadow of heavenly things? The pattern of this physical object is important. And as we see in John 2:19, Jesus was staring at this building when he said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (speaking of his own body). In a sense, he was the building. The temple is full of symbols of Christ, from the sacrificial system in the outer court; to the bread, incense, and golden candlestick in the inner court; to the red, blue, and purple veil, and the Ark of the Covenant behind it. The temple is the ultimate sin exposing/sin expelling machine. But the building is only a big, complicated advertisement for the TRUE sin exposing/sin expelling machine--the person of Jesus Christ. Interesting how Jesus called the temple his Father's house. Isn't that what his body was? No wonder he threw those money changers out of there. But this was just the beginning of a concept that would unravel so much of my own superstition and bring so much clarity in the years to follow.

In God We Trust?

Can I be frank? I absolutely hate election season. Hate it. Hate it.

And it's not because I'm apathetic. And it's not because I'm a cynic. I'm neither.

We were attending a Presbyterian Church during the last election. For those of you who don't know, Presbyterians preach Reformed Theology, which, at its core, stands on the unequivocal sovereignty of God. My pastor summed it up this way: "God takes what he wants, and he keeps what he takes."

During the election, however, my pastor worked overtime to make sure his congregation got their butts in gear to elect God's man into the White House. He was sure to wear his "I VOTED" sticker to church the following Sunday. When he preached on Evangelism, he was adamant that God was in charge of electing men to salvation. It is God's work, not ours. But when it came to electing a man to lead our country, the pastor presented a very different message. Apparently this kind election is up to us. This a Democracy after all.

He didn't seem to recognize the contradiction between his view of Reformed Theology and his view of Democracy. In fact, so many Christians that profess a strong belief in God's sovereignty also place a high premium on the voting process. Can someone please explain that to me? I can understand why an Arminian would want to help God out, but a Calvinist?

I see another serious contradiction. How do we know God's political strategies? Why do we assume that God always wants a level-headed Republican sitting in the White House to protect unborn babies, keep His name on our money, and preserve young minds from the knowledge of homosexuality. Here's a thought: Maybe things are supposed to get worse before they get better. Maybe by supporting the Republican Party we are actually voting against God.

Some people are saying that Obama is the Antichrist. Then they vote against him, as if their vote could change the book of Revelation. Amazing. It reminds me of the Christians that believed Hitler was the Antichrist and made plans to murder him. You can't change prophecy!

What right do we have to assume God's will for the world? Are we just trying to make this world a safe and moral place? The frenzy of election time can bring out the worst in Christians. Fear. Worry. Anger. Division. Sometimes I wonder how much of our hope in Democracy stems from a lack of true hope, hope in our current, spiritual Monarchy.

My friends, we have a King, though we may not always think of Him that way. Earthly rulers will come and go, men will make their plans and policies, the world will change, for better or worse. But our King will reign forever---unchangeable, full of wisdom, power, and authority.

Why are we so afraid? Let God do what He will with the world, and let us fall in line with whatever He may ask of us. It may be political. It may be educational. It may be financial. It may be spiritual. But all in all, we need to be about our Father's business.

And we shouldn't assume what that is . . .

Life and Death

Sin is not the presence of something evil, but the absence of something good. PROGRESSION OF DEATH: God breathes His life into man . . . "and he became a living soul" Man prefers a human conscience to a Holy Spirit . . . the knowledge of good and evil God removes his Spirit . . . "on the day you eat of it, you will die" Men respond with defensiveness . . . "the woman that you gave me" God tells Cain that he must master his sinfulness . . . Cain is alone Cain becomes jealous of his brother. Jealousy becomes murder. So spiritual death (the absence of God) leads to fear, insecurity, and defensiveness. These fears and insecurities lead to all other sins (name one not related to a fear or insecurity). These sins can lead to all kinds of physical, emotional, and/or psychological dysfunction, even death. Then Jesus comes to puts God back in man ("I have come to give life, and that more abundantly"), and the Holy Spirit begins to restore the pre-Fall man ("from glory to glory into His image"). Do you agree?

Weak Strength?

What would Jesus do? Whatever his Father told him to do. We often imagine Jesus as a wise and spiritual man, preaching creative sermons, condemning the hypocritical Pharisees, and helping practically everyone in his path. That is the story presented in the Gospels. In John 14, however, Jesus opens a window to his soul, showing us what was happening behind the scenes. Jesus: Disk 2, Special Features. There, we see a different man, a weaker man, one that never acted on his own initiative. Jesus even claimed that his very words were dictated by his Father. In a sense, Jesus was the weakest man that ever lived. Which made him the strongest. We can't relate to this sort of man. From the day we're born, we're encouraged to stand on our own two feet, learn to make decisions for ourselves, be responsible. In fact, for people with just one spirit, this is true wisdom. But when the Holy Spirit moves in and starts to put his feet on the furniture, we are forced to go through a major adjustment period. Jesus never had this adjustment period. He was born, in a sense, roommates with the Holy Spirit. He was a man, but he was spiritually alive. Two spirits, one body. Even at age twelve, he recognized his true Father, and demonstrated a desire to be in the temple engrossed in the family business. From birth, he was groomed for obedience, and he followed that path directly to his death. He lived for his Father by living in his Father by the Holy Spirit. He functioned like no man we have ever seen. When we try to emulate him, we often try to mimic his actions, or even to muster up the same emotions and intentions, but at the base of his motivation was a love for his Father which translated into strict obedience. For us, born independent, we must grow in this life before we can even begin to relate. Can you imagine growing to the point where you can claim that not only your actions but your very words were initiated by God?

The Motivation

What kind of person does not even speak on his own initiative? That sounds like slavery to me. Look at these 1:1's Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus . . . James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ . . . Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ . . . Jude, a bond-servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James . . . But this is not exclusive to the apostles. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant . . . Philippians 2:5-7 So, yes, we are meant to be servants of God. But a bond-servant is not exactly a slave. In fact, the difference is very important. Bond-servants were unique to Jewish culture, instituted by God to illustrate the concept of spiritual submission and obedience, but with a valid and potent motivation: If you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve for six years; but on the seventh he shall go out as a free man without payment . . . But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife and my children; I will not go out as a free man,' then his master shall bring him to God, then he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall serve him permanently. Exodus 21:2, 5-6 First of all: Ouch Second of all: This is not slavery under compulsion; this is service out of love. VERY different, and much more interesting. I am also intrigued by the fact that this slave is leaving blood on the doorpost, much like the Passover lamb. The awl is going through the man's ear, the place where he is to receive orders. The life of a bond-servant is to listen and obey. But why? "I will not speak much more with you, for the ruler of the world is coming, and he has nothing in Me; but so that the world may know that I love the Father, I do exactly as the Father commanded Me." John 14:30-31 "Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full." John 15:9-11 Love? Joy? Isn't that what everyone wants? Apparently, the very thing we hate--slavery--is the very secret to what we so desperately want.