Try here for a live version http://www.christchurchbalham.org.uk/ccb/sermons.php

The atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell was once asked what he would say if he died and found himself confronted by God and God demanded to know why Russell had not believed in him. ‘Not enough evidence, God, not enough evidence’, was Russell’s reply. Was he right? Do we agree? Many of us may be sympathetic to that view. After all, it’s not uncommon. In his book ‘The God Delusion’ Richard Dawkins writes that ‘if God existed and chose to reveal it, God himself could clinch the argument, noisily and unequivocally, in his favour’ p 50. But in our passage this morning account God does just that when he appears before a sceptic called Thomas.

We’re coming to the conclusion of our year long enterprise known as ‘The John Project’. Over the course of the last 3 terms we’ve studied John’s Gospel, one of the four eye witness documents about the life of Jesus in the New Testament.

We ought to note in passing that most biographies would have stopped in chapter 19. My genre of choice is the sporting biography and few of them have much to say beyond the individual’s death! If I’m honest few of them have anything to say before his death! Usually there’d be no more but the tying up of a few loose ends and perhaps something about the abiding significance of the person’s life. Jesus’ is the only biography ever written to need a chapter covering what happened when he came back to life after his death.

The event we’re going to look at is one of three resurrection appearances recorded by John in chapter 20 after the discovery of the empty tomb.

• In 10-18 Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene
• In 19-23 Jesus appeared to his apostles
• In 24-29 Jesus appeared to Thomas

This episode unfolds in three incidents.

1. Thomas refused to believe the eye witness testimony (24-25)

24 Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.”

Talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Whatever Thomas was doing it caused him to miss out on one of the most spectacular events in human history. But no matter, his friends were all too eager to put him in the picture and let him know what he’d missed out on. Whether he thought it was a wind up, or more likely, whether he thought they’d been deceived we’re not told. It would not seem unreasonable to conclude that Thomas thought they were deluded when they spoke about the resurrection. He wouldn’t be the only person to have made that accusation against Christians.

But perhaps we shouldn’t be too hard on him because it’s not every day that a man you’ve watched die comes back to life! As a faithful Jew he’d have believed in the general resurrection of all faithful believers at the end of time. But he’d have been less clear on the personal resurrection of the Messiah. It’s predicted in the Old Testament for those willing to find it. But it’s easier for those of us this side of Jesus’ resurrection to find it than it was to spot it in the first instance.

Thomas was no idiot. He wasn’t going to believe something just because his mates told him. He simply wouldn’t believe without hard and fast evidence. He wanted tangible proof. But the terms of belief he sets are thoroughly unreasonable. The burden of proof he requires is unrealistically high. Jesus’ resurrection appearance to the disciples was exceptional. Thomas should not have presumed that Jesus would repeat the event because he had something else in the diary.

But we do feel some sympathy for Thomas, don’t we?

We feel some sympathy with his experience. Many of us may have been subject to the enthusiastic rants of a friend. We’ve perhaps been on the receiving end of a zealous evangelist who wants to convince of the shortcomings of our unbelief. That’s not always a lot of fun!

We feel some sympathy with his predicament. We might not be so ardent in our demands for evidence but we feel it’d be so much easier to believe if God would cut through the speculation with a brief personal appearance. That’d be pretty convincing. Like Thomas we think it’s not enough to hear the witness of others and we want more.

But this [borrowed from Melvin Tinker] is worth thinking about. What if Christianity is true and God refuses to meet the terms of our demands. He’d be perfectly within His rights to ignore the preconditions we set for belief. But then we forfeit knowing Him forever. What if God has given us, as He gave Thomas, sufficient evidence for belief and yet by stubbornly sticking to our high demands we ignore it? We’d be foolish to apply the wrong criteria and then miss out on something as wonderful as knowing God.

In ‘The God Delusion’ Richard Dawkins writes, ‘The whole point of religious faith, its strength and its chief glory, is that it does not depend on rational justification’ p 23. That’s absolute nonsense. There’s nothing glorious about wishful thinking. Religious faith needs rational justification because without it, it’s nothing more than vain speculation. Thomas just faith but that was to come simply by believing the apostolic testimony. There was nothing irrational about taking at face value the words of a group of men not given to exaggeration or deception.

The second incident in this episode is

2. Thomas discovered that Jesus had been resurrected (26-27)

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.”

It’s hard to know whether Thomas thought that his demands would be met. But a week later he got the shock of his life. Materialising in front of the apostles once again, the resurrected Jesus paid him a visit. Jesus didn’t have to do this. This was a totally undeserved visitation. He could have let Thomas spout his unbelieving mantra and stew in his unbelieving juice, but he didn’t. In an act of unmerited generosity, motivated by divine love, Jesus paid him a visit. I suspect it rendered obsolete his stated desire to want to inspect and touch Jesus’ wounds.

Jesus greeted him with the same words with which he had greeted his disciples. ‘Peace be with you’ was not a mere platitude or polite pleasantry. It was a declaration of accomplishment and a pronouncement of reassurance. Peace with God is what Jesus’ death and resurrection had accomplished. He was doing no more than spelling out the implications for this group of believers. Through his self sacrificial work of dying in our place he has borne the punishment for our sinful wrongdoing. Through his resurrection God has raised him to life, accepted his sacrifice and welcomed him and all he represents into His eternal presence. Jesus could offer peace because he’s accomplished peace. He’d turned a hostile relationship into a reconciled one.

In addition to these words of reassurance, Jesus had some words of rebuke. He said in no uncertain terms, ‘do not disbelieve but believe’. Jesus commanded Thomas to stop being an unbeliever. Jesus didn’t affirm his doubt he scolded him for it. In the face of militant atheism these days it’s easy to view the undecided, un-persuaded agnostic in a kinder light. And there’s something to be said for that. But Jesus isn’t so positive. He got stuck into Thomas because of his refusal to believe the evidence. In other words, in Jesus’ opinion it wasn’t for lack of evidence that Thomas remained an unbeliever. The apostolic testimony should have been enough. He lacked not the evidence but the courage to go where the evidence should have taken him.

Interestingly Richard Dawkins says, ‘I know what it would take to change my mind, and I would gladly do so if the necessary evidence were forthcoming’ p283. Given the centrality of the resurrection for the truth of Christianity you’d have thought that he’d devote considerable space to it. But he doesn’t mention the resurrection once. That’s a shame because it’s compelling evidence. You can’t really expect to deny the existence of God and persuade anyone and yet never deal with the single strongest strand of evidence. That’s deluded! We must investigate the evidence like Thomas. Sure, we’re unlikely to have a repeat performance but the evidence is there to be investigated if we’re willing to look.

The third incident in this episode

3. Thomas responded with personal confession (28)

28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”

Thomas’ words are not the irreverent equivalent of ‘oh my word!’ or ‘Jesus Christ, I wasn’t expecting that’. This is a deep personal confession of faith. Thomas had changed his mind. Jesus was, in his opinion, both Lord and God. He is not simply the Nazarene carpenter with a knack for story telling and cultivating religious revivalism. He is God, the divine creator of the universe in a human body. He is Lord, the ruler of the world who demands and deserves our submission. But his confession was more than intellectual assent to the proposition that Jesus was divine. Twice he adds the possessive pronoun ‘my’. Thomas accepted Jesus’ right to rule over him. Thomas welcomed Jesus as His God and His Lord. This is crucially important. At the heart of Christianity is not a set of propositions that we’re to ascent to as a true and accurate presentation of metaphysical realities, though they are that. At the heart of Christianity is a person we’re to relate to. We can’t relate to him in exactly the same immediate way that Thomas related to him because he isn’t right here in front of us. Our relationship with Christ is still through his word as it’s mediated through the scriptures. In his absence we don’t hear that word come straight from his mouth we read it from the page. But we nevertheless still relate to him as Lord and God. He is our ruler and Christians depend upon him to govern our lives.

The question raised by this incident is whether we, like Thomas, have come to the point where we have come before the risen Christ and personally confessed that he is ‘my Lord and my God?’ We may, of course, need to ask the prior question ‘is there a Lord and a God?’ And we must do that. But having been persuaded of His existence we can’t languish in no man’s land without accepting and submitting to Him as our Lord amd our God.

Conclusion

John presents Thomas to us as the model responder. And we’re tempted to say, ‘it was easy for him, of course he became a believer, he saw the risen Christ. If he’d wanted to he could have touched him and put his hands into his nail marks and his side’. Jesus could do the same for us. But don’t hold your breath! There’s another more normal way that he plans to convince us of his existence, his salvation and his right to rule over us. Look at (29)

29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” 30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Jesus pronounced his blessing on those who have not seen and yet have believed. The assumption is that the remainder of humanity will not have the opportunity that was afforded to Thomas to see and touch the risen body of Jesus. But the reason John wrote his gospel was so that those who read it could nevertheless become believers. Richard Dawkins wrote ‘The God Delusion’ with evangelistic intent. He writes, ‘If this book works as I intend, religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down. Of course died in the wool faith heads are immune to argument their resistance built up over years of childhood indoctrination using methods that took centuries to mature’. He wants to persuade people to become atheists. He’s just worried that faith makes us immune to argument.

John wrote his gospel with a similar evangelistic intent. It’s as though John could have written, ‘If this book works as I intend, unbelieving readers who open it will be believers when they put it down’. The only question is whether we’re prepared to read it with an open mind and a heart that’s attuned to argument not immune to evidence. It’s already too late for Bertrand Russell. He’s met his maker and unless he changed his mind at the last minute he’s been met with the eternal rebuke of God. But it’s not too late for us. So what will we do? Are we willing to engage with the evidence or does that seem too much like hard work? John would have us read his gospel. For those who want to take things a little further you may find our termly Christianity Explored courses a help. Come and see me at the end if you’re interested www.christianityexplored.com.

Our task tonight is to think about eschatology. Eschatology is taken from the Greek word, ‘eschatos’ which means ‘last’. So we’re thinking about the last things. We’re thinking about God’s intended destination for His creation. We’re thinking about the arrival of the end.

But why start here? Why not leave it till the end? It’s where the gospel starts. The gospel is a promise concerning the future Kingdom of God. We can experience the inuagurated kingdom here and now through the Spirit’s work but the full experience of that kingdom awaits a future consummation in the future. The gospel is a promise that through faith in Christ’s work we will participate in that future kingdom. That’s why we’re starting here. We want to think about what the gospel promises so that we can work out whether we think it’s worth it!

In the unfolding scheme of human history there will be three significant events.

1. The Lord will return

The first thing that will happen is that the same Jesus Christ who departed from this world at his ascension will return.[i] Jesus has gone but he’s coming back.

The New Testament uses three common terms to refer to his return.

1. The arrival of Christ, from the Greek word ‘parousia’. This conveys the sense of the personal return of Christ. It was used in the first century for the visit of the Emperor. It is the commonest term in the New Testament for Jesus’ return.[ii]

2. The revelation of Christ, from the Greek word ‘apokalypsis’. This conveys the sense that things now hidden will one day come to light as the things which obstruct our vision of Christ are removed.[iii] The Lord’s coming will reveal who he is and what the world is.

3. The manifestation of Christ, from the Greek word ‘epiphaneia’. This conveys the idea of things now hidden being manifested or appearing.[iv]

Jesus’ return is not a peripheral issue in the Bible. There are more than 250 clear references to it. These show unambiguously that this is a matter of central concern in biblical thought. Whilst some of our Christian brethren may become over excited with over elaborate and speculative affirmations about the end times we must not allow their infatuation with peripheral issues to distract us from the core and clear issues that surround Jesus’ return. There are especially two things to note about the Lord’s return.

a. the nature of his return will be glorious

A complete description of Jesus’ return is impossible. It will be an event which will transcend the capacity of words to capture it. The depiction of his return in scripture is accurate, we’re not being miseled. The depiction is sufficient in detail, it’s everything that God thinks we need to know. But the depiction is not exhuastive. It’ll be even better than it sounds. And it sounds awesome!

Jesus’ first arrival took place in obscurity and weakness and it hardly seemed to cause a ripple on the surface of human history. Not so his return! His second arrival will be universally manifest. On his return he’ll come with his angels, be surrounded by blazing fire, against a backdrop of lightning flashes accompanied by dramatic volume.[v] Jesus’ return will be the final act of the unveiling of the divine presence, the culminating revelation of the majesty and transcendent glory of the Lord. It will be unmistakable. There will be no doubt whatsoever that he has returned. Somehow the whole world will see him.

b. the time of his return is unknown

The return of Christ will be sudden and unexpected.[vi] Jesus professed ignorance of the time of his return and explained that it was something that not even his apostles were to know.[vii] But it’s also true that the scriptures speak of certain events or signs that will precede Christ’s coming. The disciples asked Jesus what to expect before his return.[viii] Jesus’ response spoke of a period of time preceding his return characterized by four general features; religious apostasy, persecution and the world wide witness of the church, wars and conflicts between nations and disturbances in the natural order.[ix] It’s tempting to think therefore that we can plot the events and predict the time of Jesus’ return. But Jesus’ view was that we simply cannot predict when he will return. We need to remember that the signs are not given primarily to satisfy our curiosity about the end of the world. They point instead to Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah who had come to introduce the last days, the final period of history before he will return to judge.

• These signs are not restricted to the end of time immediately before Christ returns but they characterise the period in between Christ’s first and second comings.
• These signs are not to be used to date the return of Christ, their purpose is to reassure us of the certainty of his return but not the chronology of it.
• These signs relate especially to the preaching of Christ’s gospel and the opposition to Christ’s rule.

With respect to the preaching of Christ’s gospel three things must occur

• This gospel will be preached to all nations, which doesn’t mean that every person without exception must hear it before Christ returns. It means that missionary activity will dominate this period of church history.[x]
• This gospel will be preached to Israel, which means that this period will be characterised by Jews accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament. There may well be a period towards the end of the last days in which greater numbers of Jews are converted.[xi]
• The gospel will be preached in the power of the Spirit, which means that Jesus will equip his followers to fulfil the missionary enterprise that he outlined in his great commission.[xii]

With respect to the continuing opposition to Christ’s rule three things will characterise this time

• There will be a period of tribulation during which time God’s people will suffer persecution. This will intensify immediately prior to his return.[xiii]
• There will be widespread apostasy as those who profess to be followers show their true colours and betray Christ. Once again there will be an intensification of this desertion immediately prior to Jesus’ return.[xiv]
• There will arise a figurehead known as the Antichrist who will be especially blasphemous and who will assert himself against Christ as an alternative to him.[xv] But the New Testament also speaks of many antichrists whose rebellious attitude typifies the spirit of the Antichrist.[xvi]

It’s hugely fascinating to study the scriptures and try to interpret the signs of the times in order that we might be able to predict when Jesus will return. We wouldn’t be the first to do so.

William Miller, from whom the modern Seventh Day Adventist Movement traces its descent, developed ‘kingdom arithmetic’. He predicted that the second coming would occur between March 21st 1842 and March 21st 1843. Obviously, Jesus did not return during that time. Disappointment swept through the Millerite ranks and once again embarrassment hovered over the church. Miller undaunted asserted that he had miscalculated. He refigured and asserted with confidence that Christ would return on October 22nd 1844. Most of the Millerites sold or gave away their possessions and prepared their wardrobe for the coming of the kingdom. They gathered in white robes and waited, and waited. October 23rd came and Christ did not return. The rumour that someone drew up alongside him, put his arm around him and said ‘don’t worry mate, it’s not the end of the world’ are totally unfounded!

But that’s not what Jesus had in mind when he spoke about being watchful. The signs aren’t there to tell us that the Lord’s return is imminent but that it’s certain. They tell us that he’s definitely coming and we must be ready for him when he comes.

Jesus is coming back. That’s where history is headed. It’s not like Groundhog Day where everything just keeps happening over and over again. And so Jesus exhorted his followers to eagerly anticipate and watch for his return.[xvii] We’ve got to be prepared for it because it’s going to happen. Some of us here need to make sure that we’re not caught out by his sudden return.

2. The dead will be raised

Bernard Manning, the comedian who died this week said this in an obituary he wrote about himself for the Daily Mail, ‘As I look down … and as I sense the affection from the mass of the British public, I know that I’m the one having the last laugh’. I have no idea whether he had a Christian faith, given what he said it’d be surprising. I don’t know where he got his ideas of the afterlife from either. But we all want to know what happens to us after we die.

The Bible’s answer is that we go on living. Both believers and unbelievers continue to exist consciously.

Assuming that we’re not around on this earth when Christ returns then there’ll be two phases to our life after death. There’s the intermediate state and the eternal state.

• The intermediate state is an interval of time in which the dead await the final judgment and the resurrection of the body.
• The eternal state refers to the experience after the judgement of Christ. During these times, the experience of the believer is very different from the experience of the unbeliever.

a. Believers to everlasting life in heaven

After death believers go immediately to be with Christ. Christ is at the Father’s right hand and in scripture the Father’s dwelling place is often called ‘heaven’ so we often say that when believers die they go to heaven. This word has various meanings in scripture but the predominant theological meaning is that it’s the place where God dwells. It’s a real place, in space and time. God is immaterial and is not limited to any place, not even to heaven, but it seems to be that heaven is the place where He manifests Himself in the most intense way. Whether we’ll be material or immaterial is not something I’ve resolved to my own satisfaction as yet. There are two alternatives often suggested. One is the doctrine of purgatory and the other is the doctrine of soul sleep.

Purgatory is a Roman Catholic idea built on a text from an apocryphal book called Maccabees. It’s not part of the New Testament canon it’s religious fiction. But the idea is that most of us aren’t good enough for heaven and so we need to suffer and undergo purging before we enter heaven. The trouble is that the Bible teaches that Jesus dealt with our sin in his death. He doesn’t need help from us to finish off the bits he missed!

Soul sleep seems more plausible because it employs biblical language. Proponents argue that in between our death and the eternal state believers slip into an unconscious state like sleep until they’re awoken by Christ on his return.[xviii] But the Bible teaches that even though sleep can be used as a metaphor for death the believer goes directly to be with Jesus.[xix]

The Bible says very little about the intermediate state which is frustrating because we want to satisfy our curiosity. The most important thing about it is that we’re with the Lord. It’s not the final state, there’s yet still much to look forward to but we are safe in his presence.[xx]

When Jesus returns to earth he will bring all his saints with him. Their bodies will rise up from the ground and believers living on earth will be caught up to meet him in the air. This is known as the rapture. There’s much debate amongst theologians about exactly when that will take place but no one doubts that it will happen. The various views on the rapture are usually tied in with various views of the millennium. People can be amillennial, pre-millennial and post millennial.

I once asked David Jackman for his views on the millennium and he said that he was pan-millennial. When I pressed him he said that it meant he was confident that it would all pan out OK in the end! Millennialism is a subject with which we’re not going to deal this evening. But there’s something on the blog about the dispensational Premillennialism of the ‘Left Behind’ series if you wanted to chase that up http://richardperkins.blogsome.com/2007/06/26/left-behind/.

After that will come God’s final judgement in which every human being will be held responsible and called to account.[xxi] Believers will be judged even though there’ll be no condemnation for those for whom Christ has secured forgiveness.[xxii] We’ll be judged according to our works. Every thing we’ve ever done, every thought we’ve ever had and everything we’ve ever said will be made known and judged. As Matt Fuller says in his article in ‘The End’ Revive 06

When we think back over even just the last week our most depraved moments, our most horrific thoughts and our most ugly motives will be exposed for our friends, our family, our colleagues and the whole world to see. And Christ will turn to us, smile and say ‘you’re forgiven, I’ve made you perfect’.

After judgement we will be kitted out with our resurrection bodies. This body will be imperishable, powerful and spiritual.[xxiii] It will be perfectly suited for life in the eternal realm, which we’ll think about in a moment.

Joni Eareckson Tada put it this way,

‘If you were to tell that tiny acorn that one day he would be as tall as a building with heavy branches and thick green leaves, a tree so great it would house many squirrels, that nut would say you were crazy. A gigantic oak tree bears absolutely no resemblance to an acorn. But they are related. Somehow, somewhere within that acorn is the promise and pattern of the tree it will become. Somehow, somewhere in you there is the pattern of the heavenly person you will become’.

b. Unbelievers to everlasting punishment in hell

We will, I trust, take no pleasure in examining the fate of those who remain unbelievers. We have to deal with this side of the salvation equation out of loyalty for Christ and out of love for unbelievers. Despite the fact that much of contemporary evangelicalism tries to marginalise Jesus’ teaching on this issue we’re not free to pick and choose which bits of the Bible we’re prepared to believe. It’s salutary to remember that of all the biblical teachers Jesus has the most to say about eternal punishment. He didn’t shy away from mentioning it in public nor of spelling out its implications. He did so because of his familiarity with hell’s reality. There was no debate in his mind about the fate of the unbeliever. And he did so out of compassion for the lost.

In the intermediate state unbelievers are in torment awaiting judgement. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus, in my opinion, points us in that direction.[xxiv] This means that although the final judgement remains future our eternal destinies are set at death. After death, no one can change from being an unbeliever into a believer. Unbelievers enter the eternal state after the judgement. The eternal state is characterised by everlasting punishment.[xxv]

This teaching has been undermined in recent years by a position known as annihilationism. Proponents of annihilationism teach that unbelievers are not punished forever but at some point are simply put out of existence. The Bible however is clear on this subject and we must not let our distaste for this doctrine overwhelm our duty to follow Christ’s teaching. We must not let our compassion for the lost overwhelm our concern for God’s glory. We must concede that there is language that says the wicked will be destroyed but that does not necessarily mean annihilation. Destruction is used in the sense of no longer being for purpose. If a car has been written off we might say that it’s been destroyed which means not that it’s ceased to exist but that it’s ceased to be useful.

It appears deeply unfair that God should punish people eternally and so many of us struggle to comprehend the existence of hell. But we need to remember that each sin is an affront to an eternally holy God. Trying to calculate what our sin deserves is beyond our comprehension but it shouldn’t surprise us that such sins are infinitely offensive and deserve eternal penalty.

In summary believers go to be with God, awaiting the future resurrection of their bodies. Unbelievers go to a place of punishment, awaiting the final verdict against them at the last judgement. Both the righteous and the wicked will be raised physically to stand before God in the final judgement. Then the wicked will be punished eternally, while those in Christ will live with God in the new heavens and the new earth. The dead will be raised. There is an existence beyond the grave. We will not end in death.

3. The universe will be recreated

After the final judgement believers will enter into the consummated or perfected kingdom of God. We often speak about being in heaven after Christ returns. We don’t want to be overly pedantic but that’s not strictly true.

The Bible speaks of the new heavens and the new earth when there will be a future unification of heaven and earth.[xxvi] God has subjected this fallen creation to frustration because of human sin and it’s eagerly awaiting freedom from its bondage to decay.[xxvii] There’s some discussion about whether this world will be completely destroyed and God will start again with a whole new batch of stuff or whether He’ll take the marred mess that this world has become and re-fashion it. As with our resurrection bodies I take it that there will be both transformation and continuity when the earth is recreated. It will be this world that’s re-created but it will be this world transformed so that it’s unrecognisably recognisable. There will be all sorts of questions that we have about the nature of our existence in the new creation. Revelation 21 settles some of them.

3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”

But two things stand out.

a. it will be wonderful because of what is absent

There will be no more mourning, crying or pain. A friend summarises that comforting depiction by saying that we’ll have no need of hankies, hearses or hospitals in heaven. It’ll still be a physical place and we’ll enjoy physical pursuits like recreation, sport and work but there’ll be no sin. Ed has been building a shed and he thinks the fall is responsible for his inability to get it to fit together. He may have a point. We won’t sin. Imagine that. We won’t have to battle with temptation. There’ll be no lust, no envy, no anger and no resentment.

b. it will be wonderful because of who is present

The most important blessing of believers in the eternal state is the presence of God Himself. For all eternity we live with Jesus, seeing God face to face.

For the last few weeks our kids have been beside themselves with excitement at the prospect of meeting Colin Buchanan. Just before Revive Rufus asked me whether Colin was real so worried was he that Colin would turn out to be a fictional character from the DVDs he’d watched.

Can you imagine relating to God without the handicap of sin? Sin is the great barrier to enjoying intimacy with God. In the eternal state we are forever separated not only from the punishment that sin deserves but the power that sin exerts over us. It’s described like being at a feast.[xxviii] Another way in which scripture describes our blessing in Christ is an inheritance.[xxix] But the inheritance is not something physical like the contents of our parents bank balance or more usually the contents of their loft. The inheritance is God Himself. He will be our God and we His people. He will give us productive work to do as we exercise dominion over the creation as Adam and Eve were intended to. There are times in this creation when among the greatest moments we experience is the delight of spiritual intimacy with God. For some of us that may not be very frequent or even a very vivid memory but there are times when we’ve felt close to the Lord and in a heightened state of enjoyment that we belong to Him.

Let’s close with the implications of this doctrine

This is the future. How do we respond to that? Well I guess it depends which one is our own personal future. If we’re an unbeliever the future is profoundly unpleasant and we need to be very frightened. If we’re a believer the future is absolutely amazing.

1. it should keep us talking to our friends about Christ so that they share with us the joy of adoption into God’s family and they won’t be excluded from heaven

2. it should keep us waging war on the sin that deceives us into thinking that it’s more enjoyable to give into temptation than it is to be in heaven

3. it should keep us from making this earth our home and seeking satisfaction in this temporary world when ultimate happiness is to be found in glory

4. it should keep us going in the midst of trials for this momentary suffering is but a blip in God’s eternal plans for his heavenly people

5. it should keep us focussed on our Saviour and Lord who has rescued us and who will direct our lives under his wonderful kingship for all eternity

If you wanted to take this issue further let me recommend some resources. You could do a lot worse than digging out your copy of the Revive 06 book called The End. This book by Edward Donnelly has the worse design I have ever seen on a Christian book but the contents is brilliant.

• [i] Acts 1:5
• [ii] Matthew 24:3, 1 Corinthians 15:23, 1 Thessalonians 2:19, 2 Thessalonians 2:1&8, Luke 19:12
• [iii] 1 Corinthians 1:7, 2 Thessalonians 1:7, 1 Peter 1:7 [iv] 2 Thessalonians 2:8, Titus 2:13
• [v] Angels Matthew 16:27, 25:31, Fire 2 Thes 1:7, Lightning Matt 24:27, Volume 1 Thes 4:16
• [vi] Matthew 24:37-44, 1 Thes 5:1-6
• [vii] Mark 13:32 & Acts 1:7
• [viii] Matthew 24:3
• [ix] For the four events see Mark 13:5f, Mark 13:9-11, 13 & 19, Mark 13:7, Mark 13:8, 24f
• [x] Isaiah 42:6 & 52:10, Matthew 24:14
• [xi] Romans 11:25 [xii] Matthew 28
• [xiii] Daniel 12:1, Matthew 24:9 & 21
• [xiv] Matthew 24:10-12 & 24, 1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Timothy 2:3, 2 Thes 2:1-3
• [xv] 2 Thes 2:4, Mark 13
• [xvi] 1 John 2:22, 2 John 1, 1 John 2
• [xvii] Mark 13:37
• [xviii] Matthew 9:24, 27:52, John 11:11
• [xix] John 11:11-14, Matthew 9:24, 27:52
• [xx] Revelation 6:10-11
• [xxi] Matthew 10:15, 11:22 & 24, Acts 17:30-31, Revelation 21:11-15
• [xxii] 2 Cor 5:10, Matt 25:31-46, Romans 14:10-12, Romans 8:1, John 5:24
• [xxiii] 1 Cor 15:42-44
• [xxiv] Luke 16
• [xxv] Matthew 25:41 & 46, Revelation 14:11, Mark 9:43 & 48, Luke 16:22-24 & 28, Rev 19:3, Rev 20:10
• [xxvi] Isaiah 65:17, Isaiah 66:22, 2 Peter 3:13 Revelation 21:1
• [xxvii] Romans 8
• [xxviii] Revelation 19:9
• [xxix] Matthew 25:34, Acts 26:18, Eph 1:11, 14 & 18, Col 1:12, 3:24, Heb 9:15, 1 Peter 1:4, Rev 21:7

The last book in the series of novels by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, known as ‘Left Behind’, has just been published. It’s a publishing phenomenon. Especially in the US. but perhaps we’d anticipate finding an infatuation with all things apocalyptic. But it’s also taken over UK Christian bookshops. Several novels feature in the Amazon.co.uk top ten list for religious fiction.

You may have been left behind by the ‘Left Behind’ phenomenon? Don’t worry, it’s not the end of the world. Except that it is! Because these end time books are all about life on earth during the post rapture tribulation. I know it’s a cheesy gag but I couldn’t resist it! Words from the official movie web site say,

In one chaotic moment, millions of people around the world suddenly disappear, leaving their clothes, wedding rings, eye glasses and shoes in crumpled piles. Mass confusion hits while vehicles suddenly unmanned veer out of control, fires erupt and hysteria breaks out as the living stare in disbelief and fear at the empty places where their loved ones were just seconds before. This is the rapture that God has planned as the first sign to begin the unraveling of the end of time.

There are some very serious issues that the books raise which I aim to deal with briefly in this slot.

1. The books are incredibly popular

By May 2004 the series of novels had sold over 62 million copies. This book has been adapted into a feature film called ‘Left Behind: The Movie’. Do you see what they’ve done there?! It was first released on DVD and then bombed at the cinemas. There have been two sequels released straight to DVD and a fourth instalment has been announced. According to Wikipedia the Simpsons parodied the film in an episode in May 2005 called ‘Thank God It’s Doomsday’. Homer sees the film ‘Left Below’ and becomes greatly concerned about his role in the imminent Rapture. This just means that lots of people will have been influenced by the ideas that they raise. Whether that’s a good thing or not depends on what’s in them.

2. The books have been widely criticised

There have been some positive reviews from secular sources.

• The New York Times praised it saying that it ‘combines Tom Clancy-like suspense with touches of romance, high tech flash and Biblical references’.
• The Chicago Tribune called it ‘an exciting, stay-up-late-into-the-night, page turner story’.
• Publishers Weekly recognized Left Behind as ‘the most successful Christian Fiction series ever’.

But we need to remember that there were similarly glowing reviews of the Da Vinci Code and that can hardly be described as great fiction!

On the other hand, Dr David Field Oak Hill Theological College Lecturer in, amongst other things, Eschatology has written a scathing critique of the novels. You can find it here http://www.e-n.org.uk/2673-Left-Behind.htm. Left me give you a flavour of what you’ll find there,

In my view, the eschatological views of dispensational premillennialism are hermeneutically incompetent and politically dangerous. I believe that they lead to unbiblical views of spiritual warfare, an underestimate of the present reign of Christ, a failure to delight in the ‘mystery’ of the gospel and a world-denying escapist mindset.

And he is not alone in his concern.

3. The books present theology as narrative

The essential plot revolves around the sudden disappearance of millions of people world wide. Many of these events take place before people’s eyes. Frantic survivors of the disappearances begin their search for their friends and families as well as answers to what’s happened. Among them are a pilot, his daughter and a pastor. They discover that the explanation is the biblical phenomenon known as ‘the Rapture’. At the same time a young journalist follows an unknown, but charming Romanian politician, who quickly attracts millions of followers, seemingly overnight.

The effect of this type of literary genre is to convince people of the theological position that underpins the narrative as they read. It’s subtle but the authors’ particular take on millennial events is assumed and presented as fact. That wouldn’t be so bad if the particular take they had owed more to sound biblical understanding. But their take on millennial events is hotly contested. Christian theologians don’t dispute that there’ll be a rapture but its debatable whether it’ll happen the way LaHaye and Jenkins describe it. The disappearance of believers at Christ’s secret return is not my understanding of the plain reading of the text in 1 Thessalonians. 

4. The books are built on Dispensational Pre-millennialism

Dispensational Pre-millennialism is not perhaps something with which we’re too familiar. It’s an interpretation of scripture that seeks to explain events that will allegedly occur at the end of time. There are three attempts to explain what will happen in the period since the ascension of Christ and his return. They are known as Amillennialism, Postmillennialism and Premillennialism. Most evangelical Christians would either be amillennial or postmillennial. What’s known as Historical Premillennialism has an ancient heritage but Dispensational Premillennialism is a 19th Century interpretation associated with JN Darby and the Plymouth Brethren movement in this country and CI Schofield and his Bible Translation in the USA. The easiest way to understand this position is to remember the following points.

a. In Dispensational Premillennialism there are two returns of Jesus: His first return is invisible and secret and at this point he raptures believers to be with him. His second return is visible and public and he brings believers with him to rule on earth. The first return is for his saints and the second is with his saints. The period in between these two returns is known as the great tribulation. This is a period of satanic dominance which gets considerably worse in the last three and a half years. It will also be a period of effective evangelism amongst Israel as the Jews realise the error of their ways and accept Jesus as the promised Messiah. After his second return Jesus then reigns on earth for the millennium, which may or may not be a literal thousand years. At the end of this time there is another apostasy in which Satan is loosed after which comes the final judgement and the new heavens and the new earth.

b. In Dispensational Premillennialism there are two peoples of God: There is the New Testament people of God, known as the church which is made up of converted Jews and Gentiles. And there is the Old Testament people of God, the Jewish people throughout all ages. For the non-dispensationalist there is only one people of God, the people of faith throughout the ages. But for the dispensationalist Israel and the Church are distinct. And God deals with them differently. In dispensationalism Israel experience the fulness of their blessing in the millennial era and the Church experience the fulness of their blessing in the eternal state.

c. In Dispensational Premillennialism there are two types of fulfilment: The millennium is the time in which God fulfils the promises he made to the Jews. God had promised that the Jews would rule in an expanded land of Palestine. Non-dispensationalists believe that the promise of land to Israel is fulfilled in the gospel promise to all Christian believers in the new heavens and the new earth. Dispensationalists believe that the promises to Israel will be literally fulfilled in this world during the millennial reign of Christ. Dispensationalists accuse non-dispensationalists of refusing to read the Bible literally and always spiritualizing prophecy, by which they mean emptying it of it’s plain meaning.

What are the issues?

• It encourages an unbalanced infatuation with end time events that means that devotees can too easily be distracted from the real task of declaring the present day rule of Christ to the unbelieving nations.

• It encourages an unhealthy preoccupation with the minutiae of the book of Revelation rather and the alleged potential fulfilment of prophecy rather than a concern for God and His clearly revealed will.

• It encourages an unhelpful bias in foreign policy towards the state of Israel to the detriment of support for Palestinian Christians in particular.

We may choose to read them but hopefully now we’ll know what we’re reading and be able to say something sensible as an observation about them. Christian novels have never really ‘rocked my world’. It shames me to say it but I’ve only read one of the Narnia Chronicles and I’ve never finished ’Pilgrims Progress’! It’s something I’m hoping to do with the kids!

Further Resources

• Brief book review by David Field,
• Chapter in The Practical Calvinist by Vern Poythress, http://www.frame-poythress.org/poythress_articles/2002Presbyterianism.htm
• Talk by Ligon Duncan http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources/apologetics/Covenant%20Theology%20&%20Justification/Ligons_covtheology/09.htm
• http://www.matthiasmedia.com.au/briefing/webextras/the_rapture_is_anything_missing.php

Our task for the next six weeks is to deal with the Bible doctrinally. That normally sends most Christians into a flat spin! But we don’t need to panic we shouldn’t get a headache. We’re just going to think about the big ideas of the Bible. 

You’ll know that our usual approach to Bible teaching at CCB is to look at books and work our way logically through a passage. This discipline is known as exposition. We seek to expose what’s in the text and therefore what was in the author’s mind when they wrote. It pays attention to the human author’s purpose and to God’s ultimate purpose in communicating with us. It’s the standard way in which we study the Bible here at CCB. But it’s not the only way to read the Bible.

Studying the Bible systematically helps us answer people’s questions.

We can and must get to the point where we start to read the Bible systematically. This discipline is known as systematic theology. Theology is the study of God, and is derived from two Greek words, Theos, which means ‘God’, and logos, which means ‘word’ or ‘a conveying of information’. So ‘systematic theology’ is the orderly arrangement of the study of God. It seeks to arrange the whole of Biblical teaching into logical, topical divisions. It’s ‘the big ideas of the Bible’. We need to do this so that we can summarise the whole of the Bible’s teaching on any given topic. If we’ve been a Christian for a while we’ll have grown accustomed to reading the Bible as books. But the weakness of only doing this is that we’ll find it hard to answer people’s questions in evangelism, in counselling and in general. You see the questions people ask tend to be not ‘what does Mark 10:1 mean?’ but ‘what happens when we die?’ To answer that question we’ll we need to be able to summarise the teaching of several passages. Systematic theology helps us do that.

Studying the Bible systematically is not opposed to reading the Bible expositionally.

In fact a right systematic understanding of the Bible relies on good exposition. Exposition is the foundation on which systematic understanding of the Bible is built. A good and accurate systematic theology ought to be derived from a thorough and accurate exposition of every single passage in the Bible that addresses the issue that we’re thinking about. Clearly that’s going to take a bit of time and you’ll be pleased to hear that this won’t be the approach that characterises these talks. Wonderfully we don’t have to start afresh in every generation. We can build on the work and climb on the shoulders of others.

Studying the Bible systematically is open to abuse.

There’s a great danger in doing imposition rather than exposition. Imposition occurs when we impose on the Bible an understanding of a topic that God never intended. Usually that arises when we come to the Bible with a preconceived idea of what we’d like to find there. It’ll be clear that we do not have the time to show all the working behind the conclusions that I’ve come to. I’m not even going to read or refer very often to specific Bible passages. In my own notes I have footnoted almost all of them and if you would like I can e-mail you a copy. In my opinion, it’ll break the flow of the talk if I spend all the time referring to Bible passages. You could take what I’ve said and trust it but you’d be wiser to check out what I’ve said against what the Bible teaches. One of the ways to do that would be to look at every Bible passage that covers the subject under consideration. Alternatively you could invest some time in reading a good systematic theology for yourself.

If you wanted to invest some energy in this project yourself can I suggest a couple of resources that you may find useful? There are two small single volume books of doctrine that I happily recommend. The first is Bruce Milne’s ‘Know the Truth’, which is brilliant. It’s concise and easy to read. It has an interesting section on the historical development of each of the seven major doctrines he considers. And he closes each section with some applicatory points and questions for thinking over.

The second is this new one by John Frame called ‘Salvation Belongs to the Lord’. This is brilliant. It’s clear, logical and thorough. John Farme is one of the most brilliant Christian thinkers and writers in this geneneration.

If you wanted something meatier then Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology is the probably the best around. I don’t agree with everything he’s written but I don’t suppose that’ll trouble him or affect his sales! Our aim in the next six weeks is to become familiar with the general landscape of six major topics of the Bible. Many of us will have never done this.

We’ll be thinking about

1. God’s purpose as we consider where God is taking His creation
2. God’s character as we consider what God is like
3. God’s universe as we consider what the world God created
4. God’s word as we consider the means by which we know God
5. God’s Messiah as we consider Jesus Christ
6. God’s salvation as we consider all that God accomplishes in our own lives.

I’ve argued before that the dominant theme of the Bible is the Kingdom of God. So we might also phrase those six talks under the following headings

1. The goal of the kingdom: the new heavens and the new earth
2. The creator of the kingdom: the uncreated creator of everything
3. The subjects of the kingdom: the image bearers
4. The word about the kingdom: the revelation from God in the scriptures
5. The ruler of the kingdom: the person and work of Jesus Christ
6. The way into the kingdom: the work of salvation offered to us in Christ

My children are growing up with a clear understanding of Daddy’s view of dogs. They’ve pieced it together pretty convincingly from comments made about shotguns, poop and population density inside the M25. Essentially my view is derived from the apparently irreconcilable conflict between animal and human in the green parks of this fair city. When I bought the book entitled, ‘Shoot the Puppy’ [which actually has very little to do with pets and everything to do with the curious jargon of modern day life] the kids assumed that I really meant it. But in the event of us moving out of the metrop to pastures green I’m sure that, as I did, I’ll want the kids to grow up with a canine companion. In which case, this might come in handy http://www.christianitytoday.com/momsense/2007/003/11.13.html.

No kidding but I got asked this very question on my selection conference for Ordination into the Church of England. Isn’t it good to know that our clergy are thoroughly vetted before being let loose on an unsuspecting population!

It comes from ‘Dealing with the Death of a Pet; Teaching your preschooler about death and God’s protection’. By Dr. Henry Cloud & Dr. John Townsend

Q: Our older dog is not expected to live much longer. And our son wants to know if animals go to heaven when they die. How can I help our preschooler transition through the loss of our beloved pet?

A: The reality of death is difficult to deal with for grownups and kids alike. Yet at some point, we must all come to terms with it. Though it’s a sad time, you can help your preschooler with his pet’s death and also prepare him to deal later on with human losses, such as the death of a grandparent and others in his life. In fact, the questions he asks about his pet are often about him at a deeper level: "Will God take care of me when I die?" This is a vital opportunity for you. Preschoolers have an unformed and almost magical idea of death. They’re not sure what dying is all about. They don’t have a clear idea if it’s like sleeping or if it’s a trip to another dimension. They don’t know if it’s good, bad, permanent or temporary. Your basic task is to help your child see that the death of a pet is real. And yet it’s a reality that’s bearable because he has a mom who will help him understand and deal with it. Here are some steps to follow:

Death is a normal reality. Your preschooler needs to know that pets and people get old or sick and die; this is a normal part of life. Though we don’t like death, it’s not something that scares or panics Mom. It’s "the way things go." Your child needs to know he’s with a safe parent who can handle this sort of reality. Then he’ll feel prepared to deal with it.

God loves pets (and people). Reassure your child of God’s love and care for your pet. He knows what’s best for him and for all of us. Read to him David’s words from the Psalms: "You care for people and animals alike, O Lord." Psalm 36:6 (NLT) God is involved and protective. And he’s stronger than death. Personally, we believe there’s a case for the Bible to teach that animals are in heaven! Check out your local Christian bookstore for authors who write about this.

It’s OK to feel sad. Sadness and grief are God’s way of helping us honor those we’ve lost, let them go and move on. Tell your child you understand how much he misses his pet. Tell him you’re sad, too, and that it’s OK to cry. Comfort his sad feelings and talk with him empathetically.

Create a positive memory. Help your preschooler remember what he loved about his pet. Remembering helps a child create a positive emotional memory inside his heart about his relationship with his pet. It also helps with the grief process. Talk about the funny and cute things his pet did in the home and what a great pet he was.

Get back into life’s activities. Grief was not intended to be permanent, but a season. Preschoolers will normally not be sad for too long and will be ready for you to help them get busy with their activities and friends. When your son has expressed his feelings and remembered what he loved about his pet, guide him toward his normal activities. And depending on your family circumstances think about getting a new pet. Use your pet’s passing as a learning time about death’s reality and also God’s protection. Your preschooler is looking for a way to understand, accept and deal with death so he can continue growing and living.

What I love about this answer is the way they don’t actually deal with the question. They seem to assume that Dad’s completely disengaged. They seem to assume that the kid’s a lad. This is probably fair since pre-school girls are bright enough to have worked it out for themselves!

So what’s my view of pets and the New Creation?

I’m not convinced that Revelation 22:15 should be understood literally. It’s a metaphor.

But let’s assume that the city of the New Jerusalem has large expanses of green, let’s assume that dogs still need to biologically process their food in the customary way. There are I suppose two options. First, since dog owners will be sinless they’ll presumably vigilantly and selflessly ’scoop the poop’ every time without fail. And secondly, since I’ll be sinless it won’t irritate me like it does now when dogs do what they have to do! This may be the greater miracle!

Here’s something that will provoke discussion and divide opinion! Spotted it in the Sunday Times this weekend http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article1913127.ece. There are some great quotes. For example,

Anxiety is the bindweed of motherhood, and we don’t need anything extraneous fuelling our neurosis and self-reproach. Laughter is crucial in this culture of angst-ridden parenting.

and,

Motherhood is something best done by amateurs, and, actually, most of us bumble through it pretty successfully.

and finally

The urge to micromanage life is a way of trying to provide a semblance of order amid what sometimes feels like a sea of uncertainty.

But here’s a couple of lists to help you work out where you are on the parenting spectrum!

HOW TO SPOT A BETA MUM

• You can tell what her children had for breakfast by looking at her jeans
• She has been known to wear pyjamas on the school run
• She forgets children’s birthday parties
• She gets drunk at PTA parties
• You can’t see the floor of her car for old sweet wrappers, assorted papers and general detritus
• She tries to remember what sex was like with her husband
• Her house is in a state of perpetual clutter
• She has rotten fruit and bribery sweets in her handbag
• She runs out of petrol on the school run

HOW TO SPOT AN ALPHA MUM

• Her children’s activities timetable is more complicated than a Heathrow flight plan
• She has a copy of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Families on her bookshelf
• Her nanny speaks Mandarin
• She schedules childbirth for the right month of the school year
• She knows the exact nutritional content and GI rating of what her children eat
• She schedules sex with her husband
• She has a drawer with cards and presents for all occasions
• She always manages to get a front-row seat at school plays
• She serves alphabet pasta at tea, so that her children can practise their spelling

Continuing thoughts in preparation for a seminar at Revive 07 http://www.christchurchbalham.org.uk/ccb/revive.php. The following material summarises some of the helpful discussion in Don Carson’s book, ‘Showing the Spirit’. I’ve posted on tongues here http://richardperkins.blogsome.com/2007/04/26/speaking-in-tongues/.

Introduction

There are four crucial passages in the book of Acts in which the phenomenon of speaking in tongues is recorded for us [Acts 2, 8, 10 & 19]. In order to begin to reach a conclusion about the abiding practice and significance of this experience we need to understand these passages in their salvation historical context. This short article is an attempt to do that.

Analysing the Passages

In analysing the passages it is perhaps helpful to think of answers to four questions

• Who were the recipients of the experience?
• What was the nature of the experience?
• Who were the witnesses of the experience?
• What was the intent behind the experience?

Acts 2

2:1 When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6 And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. 7 And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.” 12 And all were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” 13 But others mocking said, “They are filled with new wine.” 

Who were the recipients of the experience?

The group certainly included the Apostles (1:26) and probably a wider group of 120 disciples (1:15). There is no reason in the text to assume that the experience of speaking in tongues was limited to teh Apostles. It appear likely that all the disciples who received the Spirit attested to His receipt through speaking in tongues.

What was the nature of the experience?

Luke makes it clear that the ‘other tongues’ spoken by the disciples on the day of Pentecost were real human languages. The different national groupings in the crowd heard the disciples praising God for his ‘mighty works’. But they heard it in their mother tongue. The charge of drunkenness levelled at the disciples doesn’t necessarily mean that people heard gibberish and not real languages. It makes more sense to suppose that those who made this accusation heard nothing in their own language and so couldn’t understand what was being said and concluded that the disciples were drunk.

Who were the witnesses of the experience?

Although non-believers heard the disciples declaring the ‘mighty works of God’ these tongues were not essentially evangelistic. It would be more accurate to suggest that the Jews and Proselytes in Jerusalem heard praise. This then generated the question ‘what does this mean?’ that led to Peter’s sermon.

What was the intent behind the experience?

Luke presents the Spirit’s ‘descent’ on the Day of Pentecost as the fulfilment of the prophecy made by John the Baptist. John promised that after him would come one who would baptise in the Holy Spirit [Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16 & John 1:33]. Jesus reminded his disciples of that very same promise in Acts 1:5. He commanded his disciples to remain in Jerusalem until the gift of the Spirit had been given. The gift of the Spirit at Pentecost signalled the beginning of the Messianic era in which the ascended Messiah would baptise his people in the Spirit. This was a climactic salvation-historical event. Luke’s emphasis is not on paradigmatic Christian experience but on the fulfilment of prophecies such as Joel 2. Peter makes just this point in his sermon. He regarded the tongue speaking phenomenon as the fulfilment of Joel’s promise that in the new covenant era all God’s people would prophesy. Peter’s point was not that all disciples would speak in tongues. His point was that all would speak God’s words and therefore tongue speaking can be included under the broad banner of prophecy.

Summary

In Acts 2 the phenomenon of speaking in tongues involves speaking foreign languages. In 1 Corinthians this does not appear to be the case. In Acts 2 the tongues sepaking was aimed not at an unbelieving crowd to engender belief but at God to praise His deeds. This is consistent with the material in 1 Corinthians 14 where tongue speaking is said to be addressed primarily to God and a gift used in prayer [1 Corinthians 14:2&14]. It is indisputable that these first disciples spoke in tongues. However, given the unique salvation hostorical significance we cannot use it to demand a contemporary, post conversion personal Pentecost experience for every believer. It’s worth noting for example that there is no evidence that the three thousand converts who believed the gospel spoke in tongues.

Acts 8

14 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. 18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give me this power also, so that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

Who were the recipients of the experience?

The recipients of the experience were Samaritan believers. This racial group were effectively ‘half breeds’. They were separated from the covenant people of God as a result of their forefathers’ apostasy after the division of the Kingdom under Rehoboam.

What was the nature of the experience?

Luke tells us that the Samaritans believed the gospel and were baptised. However, they do not receive the Spirit until Peter and John, as Apostolic delegates, travel to Samaria and lay their hands on them. The text does not explicitly say that the receipt of the Spirit was attested by the phenomenon of tongues speaking. However, it appears likely since something must have happened for Simon the Magician to make his financial offer to procure the Apostles’ power.

Who were the witnesses of the experience?

The Samaritans themselves and especially Simon, a magician who was keen to harness the spiritual power he saw for his own ends.

What was the intent behind the experience?

The two big issues in contemporary debate are whether the receipt of the Spirit was a second stage experience and whether it was intended to be normative. In my judgement it’s clear that the receipt of the Spirit was subsequent to their conversion. But to conclude therefore that this is supposed to bind all believers to a similar experience pays insufficient attention to the Luke’s emphasis in Acts of the movement of the gospel across theological divides. Luke records four instances in which the Spirit and tongues speaking are connected. The geographical-theological divides recorded in Acts 1:8 appear to be programmatic for the progress of the gospel in three distinct stages.

• In Acts 2 the Spirit was poured out on Jews in Jerusalem at Pentecost.
• In Acts 8 the Spirit comes upon Samaritans, the alienated covenant people of God.
• In Acts 10&11 the Spirit is given to mark the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant people of God.
• In Acts 19 the Spirit is granted to the disciples of John the Baptist who had fallen into a salvation historical time lag.

In each case Luke introduces a new group of believers. In each case the manifestation of the Spirit is attested by the attendant phenomenon of tongues speaking. In each case the experience is corporate not simply individual.

Summary

It appears therefore that the Spirit was withheld from these Samaritan Christians until the Jerusalem apostles could authenticate their inclusion in the one new covenant people of God. These believers had soemhow come to faith apart from the apostolic mission and so it seems as though the Lord withheld the new covenant blessing of the Spirit’s baptism and indwelling until the Apostles could link what had happened to Pentecost and legitimise their conversion.

Acts 10-11

44 While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

Who were the recipients of the experience?

Luke records that Peter spoke to the household of Cornelius. The main thing to notice is that this man, his family and friends were Gentiles.

What was the nature of the experience?

The reason that the Jewish believers knew that the gift of the Spirit had been given was that the Gentile converts spoke in tongues. It’s not clear to me that this phenomenon constitutes further use of known foreign languages. They could have been but unless the disciples were fluent in several foreign dialects they wouldn’t have been able to know! It’s also likely that the disciples heard the tongues, didn’t recognise the langauge and drew the conclusion that this was the same experience as Pentecost. The tongues could also have been more similar to those manifested in Corinth.

Who were the witnesses of the experience?

In this instance there were no unbelievers present. It was a massively significant attestation to the Jewish Christians that Gentiles could also receive the Spirit.

What was the intent behind the experience?

The tongue speaking in this instance did not communicate God’s wonderful works to unbelievers. It attested to the Jerusalem church that Gentiles could be admitted to the new covenant community without first coming under the law of Moses.

Summary

This was a Gentile Pentecost. It was a re-run to make clear that the Lord accepted Gentiles into the new covenant community and gave them the Spirit without requiring them to become Jews first.

Acts 19

19:1 And it happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the inland country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.” 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying. 7 There were about twelve men in all.

Who were the recipients of the experience?

Luke tells us about a group of 12 men who had apparently become followers of John the Baptist. They had received his baptism. They had followed his ministry long enough to know that he pointed beyond himself to Jesus. But they seemed not to know anything about Pentecost and what it represented in terms of the new eschatological era of the Spirit. These disciples were caught in a salvation historical time warp. They were living in a dispensation earlier than the one in play.

What was the nature of the experience?

Presumably on hearing that there was a Holy Spirit to be received the jigsaw pieces fell into place  and they became new covenant believers in the full sense. When Paul laid his hands on them they manifested the phenomenon of speaking in tongues.

Who were the witnesses of the experience?

Luke records only that the 12 men were present.

What was the intent behind the experience?

In this instance tongues attested to the Ephesian believers that the Spirit had transferred them from one era to another. The Spirit had already been poured out on the new covenant people but they were not familiar with with His ministry.

Summary

These guys were oddities. They weren’t quite old covenant believers but neither were they new covenant believers in the full sense of that phrase. They were transitionals. Paul realised that it was odd to be a believer and not to have received the Spirit. And so we learn from him that the reception of the Spirit at conversion is normal. It’s not normally a subsequent act to faith. Acts 19 is virtually unrepeatable because it’s extremely unlikely that a group would encounter a disciple of John the Baptist who is a believer in Jesus’ death and resurrection but ignorant of Pentecost.

Conclusion

This brief consideration of the Acts material on tongues shows

1. Tongue speaking accompanied the progress of the gospel across geographical-theological boundaries to authenticate the inclusion of groups joining the New Covenant people of God.
2. The experience of these disciples was unique and is not intended to be paradigmatic for Christian conversion. Acts records these four instances because they’re significant not because they’re normative. There are more instances in the book where people come to faith without manifesting the attendant phenomenon of tongues speaking amd so on. But the conviction that this is normative is not built on a case of statistics but on theology.
3. There is no biblical case for a necessary subsequent spiritual experience in which a believer speaks in tongues. The occasions on which it occured in Acts can better be explained as unique occurences rather than normative Christian experience.

A talk for a men’s breakfast at CCB

Proverbs is a book about being smart. If we want to be smart then the way to begin is to seek a right relationship with God [Proverbs 1:7]. In seeking to be smart friendships are very important. Instinctively we know that.

It’s no surprise therefore that the most popular show of the last decade was ‘Friends’. They had what we all wanted. They were the surrogate family who was always there for you. The theme tune by the Rembrandts summed it up brilliantly

So no one told you life was gonna be this way

Your job’s a joke, you’re broke, your love life’s D.O.A. [Dead on Arrival]

It’s like you’re always stuck in second gear

When it hasn’t been your day, your week, your month, or even your year,

But I’ll be there for you, when the rain starts to pour

I’ll be there for you, like I’ve been there before

I’ll be there for you, ‘cause you’re there for me too

I thought it’d be a useful way to spend our morning together considering what the book of Proverbs has to teach us on this subject. There are five dominant themes that emerge on the subect of ‘mateship’.

1. A mate is a bloke we can rely on

Fair weather friends are two a penny. It takes no effort to gain acquaintances if we have a little bit of cash in the bank and are prepared to give it away.

19:4 Wealth brings many new friends, but a poor man is deserted by his friend.

19:6 Many seek the favour of a generous man, and everyone is a friend to a man who gives gifts.

But we’re not after fair weather friends are we? We’d like a mate who’s there for us when everyone else has deserted. Do they exist? Proverbs thinks so.

18:24 A man of many companions may come to ruin, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother.

We may think we have lots of friends. But is that true? I’m not convinced that it’s possible. Can we really have more than, say, three good mates? Don’t confuse acquaintances for friends. We may have lots of social acquaintances at a superficial level but how many of them could you ring up at 2 am and ask for help? Most of us could think of half a dozen people to carry our coffin but who would we want to be your best man? We’d want someone like this wouldn’t we?

17:17 A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.

Mates like these are priceless. They’re the types who stick with you through thick and thin. They remain loyal when it’s worth it for them and even when it’s costly.

I can think back to a time in my distant past where I made a big error of judgement that led to my employers rightly taking action against me. I was subjected to a lengthy disciplinary process and the whole thing was fairly humiliating. But my best mate at the time stuck by me and backed me. What I’d done was disgraceful and there was some cost to him being associated with someone but I can’t put a value on his commitment.

We need to be the type of people and value the type of people who are loyal. Loyalty is a precious characteristic. But loyalty isn’t the same as fawning sycophancy or as the Americans say ‘butt kissing’. And so

2. A mate is a bloke who says it straight

Some people will just tell you what they think you want to hear but in the end they’ll get caught out.

29:5 A man who flatters his neighbour spreads a net for his feet.

Lots of people may try and ingratiate themselves to us and curry favour. And in truth we’ll love it. After all who doesn’t enjoy having their ego massaged? But what we really need is someone to tell us the truth.

27:5&6 Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy.

A mate who professes to care for us but keeps his rebuke hidden, or what needs to be said concealed is no help at all. When a mate inflicts pain on us by injuring our pride with his rebuke that’s a sign of his commitment to us. There are some things only someone who knows us well can say. Sometimes in friendship we need someone tell us how it is. We can spot it coming because they usually preface their comments with, ‘Perks, can I be frank?’ to which I always want to reply, ‘you can be Frank as long as I can be Betty’. It’s not open season however. Being frank doesn’t give us licence to let rip on every small thing that irritates us and profess to do it in the name of the ‘wounds of a friend’. I take it the wounds are like necessary painful surgery. But what we say and what they say to us won’t always be welcome.

28:23 Whoever rebukes a man will afterward find more favour than he who flatters with his tongue.

The key word is afterward. No one enjoys the unpleasant experience of being corrected by a mate. But aren’t we glad after they’ve done it that they did? Don’t we want our mates to be straight with us. 

We can’t tell who our mates are by whether they’re kind to us. Real mates will say the hard things and not just the nice things. Have we got the courage to say the thing that they don’t want to hear? If we want to be a mate to someone we may have to. We need to make sure we don’t enjoy it and take perverse pleasure from sticking one on them.

3. A mate is a bloke who makes us better

Our friends influence us so who we decide to hang out with will affect us.

13:20 Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise, but the companion of fools will suffer harm.

There are some people who are just great to be with and they have such a positive influence on us we can almost feel ourselves improving in their company.

27:9 Oil and perfume make the heart glad, and the sweetness of a friend comes from his earnest counsel.

But there are others we’d be warned to steer clear of.

23:20 Be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat, 21 for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags.

It’s hard to live for Christ among the godless. It’s why I put so much emphasis on generating a social scene at CCB. Of course I can’t be part of it – I’m too old and dull. But I want there to be one. Lads coming out of a non-Christian background need new mates to help them out so that they can make progress in the Christian life. Often the blokes who are drifting in their Christian faith at church need not only doctrinal instruction but a Christian mate.

20:19 Whoever goes about slandering reveals secrets; therefore do not associate with a simple babbler.

Gossips get a bad press. Whilst we might enjoy being on the receiving end of their exciting titbits it’s a different story when we’re part of the news that they’re spreading. But the kind of bloke we’re after improves us through the time we spend together.

22:24 Make no friendship with a man given to anger, nor go with a wrathful man, 25 lest you learn his ways and entangle yourself in a snare.

Steer clear of the angry young men and the grumpy old men who haven’t got the energy to be angry!

27:17 Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another.

There’s such a thing as a healthy clash of personalities and views. We need to interact with people with whom we can disagree a little bit. A true mate should have a bit of both the reassurance and the bracing. There needs to be an exchange of ideas and viewpoints otherwise we remain where we’ve always been and never change our mind of anything!

I had a conversation with one of the young men in our congregation about 18 months ago about who he spent his time with. He’d got himself mixed up with the wrong crowd and he hadn’t the confidence to separate himself from an unhelpful influence. I’m thrilled to say that man is transformed and his life and character are a credit to the gospel. Some of us may need to think about who is influencing us at the moment.

4. A mate is a bloke won’t overstep the mark

I guess we’re talking here about tact. Tact knows what to do and when to do it. It’s fair to say that we have to learn it because it’s not natural to most of us! We need tact because friendships are vulnerable and there are some things that we can do that threaten them. That happens when we overstep the mark. It’s possible to overstay our welcome.

25:17 Let your foot be seldom in your neighbour’s house, lest he have his fill of you and hate you.

We can stifle the growth of a friendship by not allowing it air to breathe and develop. If we spend all our time hanging around so that someone feels like we’ve become their second shadow we’ll begin to get on their nerves. There’s something to be said for a bit of space because friendships can die from over exposure. It’s possible to be irritatingly hearty.

27:14 Whoever blesses his neighbour with a loud voice, rising early in the morning, will be counted as cursing.

There’s something nauseating about someone who wakes us from our slumbers with his hallelujahs. It’s possible to say the wrong thing at the wrong time.

25:20 Whoever sings songs to a heavy heart is like one who takes off a garment on a cold day, and like vinegar on soda.

It’s possible to wind someone up with a practical joke that goes too far.

26:18&19 Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death 19 is the man who deceives his neighbour and says, “I am only joking!”

It’s possible to wreck a friendship by betraying a confidence.

16:28 A dishonest man spreads strife, and a whisperer separates close friends.

Benjamin Franklin said, ‘Three people can keep a secret as long as two of them are dead!’

Self control and personal discipline are the two things that most of us lack and if we had them would transform the way we live. It’s those elusive characteristics that will save our friendships by helping us not overstep the mark.

5. A mate is a bloke who lets it go

I went to the 20-20 cricket at the Oval last night where it’s ‘de rigeur’ to swing at everything. But usually in cricket one of the key things in batting is to know which balls to play and which balls to leave. If you’re anything like me that’s where you’ll come undone. It’s the same with mates. There are times when we need to let a comment sail straight by and not have a swing at it. Listen to these proverbs.

17:9 Whoever covers an offence seeks love, but he who repeats a matter separates close friends.

17:14 The beginning of strife is like letting out water, so quit before the quarrel breaks out.

26:20 For lack of wood the fire goes out, and where there is no whisperer, quarrelling ceases.

15:1 A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.

Only this last week I had a conversation where I perhaps sought to defend our church planting policy a little too strongly and so had to send an apologetic and conciliatory e-mail. But I couldn’t let the accusations fly by without having a swing at them in an attempt to knock them for six. Learning tact is something we all need to develop.

We need the wisdom to know when to pursue a matter and when to let it go and bear the cost of any grievance.

Conclusion

Why not turn to the people around you and discuss the following three questions.

• What are the things that you think threaten friendship in London?
• What has been the thing that’s struck you most this morning?
• What’s this got to do with Jesus? How does he fulfil what we’ve been thinking about?

If you’re anything like me, and we ought to pause and acknowledge that that’s a frightening thought for both of us if you’re a woman, but if you’re anything like me then there are periods when our quiet times [QT] become very quiet indeed! This doctrine slot is intended to stimulate our thinking and provide some help with that.

Now we mustn’t for a moment think that the evangelical tradition of the quiet time exhausts the meaning of our relationship with the Lord. That’d be like saying that the one evening a week I unfailingly try to spend with Rosslyn exhausts the meaning of our relationship with my wife. There’s obviously much more to our relationship with the Lord than a 15 minute slot at the beginning of the day. There are times when most of us struggle to find the enthusiasm that’s needed to keep up the QT as a natural habit of life. Presumably that’s either because

• we lack the necessary discipline: we just can’t seem to muster the requisite self control to switch off the telly, go to bed, set the alarm clock 15 minutes sooner and get up!
• we’re not convinced of their significance: we think that we can carry on in the Christian life neglectful of cultivating our friendship with the Lord
• they’ve become unsatisfactory: we’ve become disillusioned and so we just pack them in because what’s the point in persisting with something out of habit when it seems to have no apparent benefit

There are three things to remember about quiet times.

1. A QT is a proportion of the day given to responding to God’s word 

In the same way that we carve out time in a personal relationship so too if our relationship with God is going to flourish we need to be in charge of our day. We need to avoid being dragged around by the competing interests that crowd in on us. Many things crowd our day and compete for our attention. Our spouse, our partner, our employers, the media in all its glorious forms and of course ourselves all want a slice of our time. The QT recognises that in order to prevent our relationship with God being something that we only acknowledge on a Sunday we need to carve out some time to put him first.

2. A QT is a privilege that flows from our adoption into God’s family

In the same way that the sons of the Prime Minister have privileged access to their father, so too we have privileged access to our Heavenly Father. The QT is a privilege to be enjoyed. It’s not a burden to be borne. But we tend not to think of it like that. Through the gospel we have been born again as adopted sons to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. We become children of the same heavenly Father. Therefore we enjoy the same privileges as our big brother. We have the privilege of immediate access to our loving Heavenly Father from whom we can learn and to whom we pray.

3. A QT is a priority if we’re going to mature amongst God’s people

We need God’s word not only to bring us to new life but also to sustain us in that new life. And so the prayerful study of the scriptures is something that we need to factor into our lives if we’re to make progress.

There are a number of problems that might beset us. These are the five with which I’m most familiar.

• Discipline: Or lack of it! Why not make yourself accountable to someone you trust who’s pretty similar to you who can ask you a couple of time a week how your QT’s are going. The key is that they’re encouraging without being condemning.
• Daydreaming: Mental drift is a kinder phrase! Read the Bible with pen in hand and scribble all over it making notes. If you’re uncomfortable doing that print off the passage you’re working on from the Internet. I wrote my prayers for a while but it slowed me down. I now articulate them out loud. I concede that’s harder to do on the tube!
• Drowsiness: Try and pick a time of the day when you’re awake and alert, for some that’s before the day begins in earnest, for others it’s last thing at night. If I do that I fall asleep. Why not try lunchtime if you’re at work. Many people have lunch ‘al desko’ so why not feed your soul simultaneously!
• Disruption: Soft disposable foam earplugs ones from Boots are brilliant for keeping out unwanted background noise! But pick a time of day when you won’t be disturbed.
• Dullness: We may feel that we’ve become spiritually dry. Variety is good. There are loads of helpful aids you might employ. Bible reading notes can be great but some are completely hopeless. The Good Book Company have a terrific range including the Daily Study Bible and Explore.

Explore is dated and so that might just add to the failure factor if you fall behind. You could just blank out the dates with a big marker pen!

The Daily Study Bible has everything that you need. You don’t even need a Bible because all the passages and cross references are printed. It has a couple fo questions, something to ponder and a few ideas. Before my study was available I used to escape from the Balham library into Caffe Nero and spend a useful time with the Lord and a latte.

Don Carson’s two volume ‘For the Love of God’ is dated and sets four passages to read each day. That might be a little ambitious. Set the bar low initially and build up to grander ambitions rather than set the bar high, fail and face disappointment. I used to just read the passage that he commented on! That way the book lasts four years! Volume 2 includes the same readings on the same day but Carson comments on a different passage. That way the book is really useful for two years!

‘Search the Scriptures’ is still available and I used this at university. It takes you through the whole Bible in three years. It took me through parts of the Bible in three years but that wasn’t the book’s fault. Discipline and me were distant friends at Uni. It’s a one volume book with questions and brief notes. It’s not dated! 

The expositional commentaries in the ‘Bible Speaks Today’ series or the ‘Focus on the Bible Series’ are also terrific if you have more time. The danger with these resources is that it’s possible to spend more time engaging with the commentary than the Bible! But I’m using Dale Ralph Davis’ commentary on 2 Kings in the Focus on the Bible series at the moment and it’s terrific in helping me understand that part of God’s word.

Explore gets a good review from those I know who use it. I never have. It’s not perfect and there’s things that could be improved I’m sure. However, it’s a place to start. And that may be what many of us need to do.

A kids’ slot for infant and pre-school children - it lacked visual stimulation - I should have got someone up to dress as a king and then compared them after each point to the powerful, servant, eternal king that Jesus is. But this is what I did.

What would you like to be when you grow up?

Who knows what this boy is going to be when he grows up? [picture of Prince William]

He’s going to have the job of being King of this country.

What have we been thinking about for the last few weeks? Jesus’ jobs

Who can remember how many jobs Jesus has? Three

Who can remember what they are? Prophet, Priest and King

We’ve already learnt that

• Jesus is a prophet and so he speaks for God
• Jesus is a priest and so he fixes things with God

And today we’re going to learn that

• Jesus is a king and so he’s in charge like God

Because a king is someone who’s in charge.

In the Old Testament part of the Bible God put people like Saul, David & Solomon in charge of His kingdom. But then one day God sent an angel to a girl called Mary to tell her this

‘Don’t be afraid! God is pleased with you, 31 and you will have a son. His name will be Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of God Most High. The Lord God will make him king, as his ancestor David was. 33 He will rule the people of Israel forever, and his kingdom will never end’. Luke 1:30-33

God always wanted to put Jesus in charge of His kingdom because Jesus is the best king we could ever wish for. There are three reasons why Jesus is the best king in the whole world.

1. Jesus is a powerful king

Being powerful means that you can do everything that you want.

Who is the most powerful person you can think of?

Jesus is more powerful than anyone we can think of. Jesus is the most powerful person in the whole world. Jesus is as powerful as God because he is God. That means that Jesus can do everything thing that he wants to do and no one can stop him. Jesus really wants to take us to heaven to be with him. And nothing and nobody can stop him.

In the Old Testament there were some really great kings who had lots of power. But there were lots of kings who had no power at all and so they couldn’t really do anything. Jesus isn’t just a great king he’s the best thing because he can do everything that he wants.

2. Jesus is a servant king

Being a servant means doing lots of things for other people. It means looking after people and making sure that they have everything that they need.

Who looks after you and makes sure you have everything you need?

Jesus is a better servant than all of them. Jesus is the best servant in the whole world. Jesus really wants to look after us and make sure that we have everything that we need. That’s why we should pray to him and ask him for all sorts of things.

In the Old Testament there were some kings who looked after God’s people really well. But there were lots of really bad kings who only looked after themselves. Jesus isn’t just a great king he’s the best king because he’ll always look after us.

3. Jesus is an eternal king

Being eternal means always being alive.

Who is the oldest person that you know?

Even though they’ve been alive for a long time Jesus has been around even longer. Jesus is the king who is never going to die. He died once didn’t he? But God made him alive again so that he’d live forever. Jesus will always be alive and so he’ll always be around to be our king and protect us.

In the Old Testament there were some great kings but they never lasted long. They got old and then they died and then things went wrong. Jesus isn’t just a great king he’s the best king because he’ll always be alive.

Conclusion

Jesus is our King

• He’s a powerful king so he can take us to heaven to be with him
• He’s a servant king so he wants to look after us
• He’s an eternal king so he will always be around to protect us

How amazing is that. God’s given us the best king that we could ever hope for.