The Bible Tunes Our Ears to the Voice of Jesus

In the description given by himself in John 10:27, Jesus said that a believer in him is one who receives impressions communicated from him and responds to them. So, according to Christ, Christians are those who experience a sensible, interactive companionship with Christ. As the familiar song put it, “He walks with me and he talks with me...” I have suggested some of the ways that communication from Christ is impressed upon us, ways that are not for the elite but for any of us.

There are concerning issues in attempting to apply this to ourselves, however. The individual's subjectivity and credulity can lead to hearing the voice in what isn't the voice. So we need a tool that can tune our "ears" to the voice of the shepherd so we can distinguish that from what isn't the shepherd. We need not only ears that hear, but ears that hear discerningly. The good news is that we have such a tool in the Bible. 

Scripture puts lines on the road, curbs on the highway. It keeps us steering on the course directed by the Shepherd. For the ear that’s been tuned by the Word of God, it becomes a simple task to recognize whether or not an impression is within the lines or outside them, from God or from the flesh, from the Shepherd or from the devil. Jesus quickly dispatched the noise of the devil by using the Word of God and that same Word (plus the New Testament for us) can help us do the same thing.

The Word is a light unto our feet, it shines upon the very place our feet are to fall. It primes our expectancy for the kind of things the voice will communicate so we can readily perceive them when they come. Ears tuned by the Word of God quickly ascertain what steps the voice of the shepherd is impressing us to make and enables us to make them. Kinda like the old, old song: “footprints of Jesus that make the pathway glow.”

Of course, we must make the effort to get the Word into us if it is to tune our ears. If one can read that won't present much of a problem in most places, but in other places, there's a huge problem. Bible availability, illiteracy, lack of translations present tremendous hurdles to some folk. If auditory memory served the ancient saints well in this regard, it still can in our day. However, if we have the written Word available to us, why wouldn't we make the effort to tune our ears by it?

Do we want to accompany Christ or not? If we do, the effort invested in turning our ears is of the utmost value.

Through the Word we build presuppositions that inform our readiness to hear. By the Word we inform our decisions to go with an impression or to deny it. Applying the Word we inform our “after-action reports” where we assess whether or not we actually heard and acted on the Shepherd’s voice or if we blew it in some way. The Word informs, the Word tunes our ears to hear, it presets our perspective.

We will never confidently discern the voice of the shepherd without the Word. However, we must not let our experience inform our understanding of the Word, rather we must let the Word inform our experience. Experience read into the Word will lead to distortion and error. The Word examining our experience allows us to discern the good and exclude that not from the Shepherd. If you’re going to hear the voice clearly, and grow in that skill, you’ve got to be in the Word!

Hearing the Voice of Jesus

Can Christians expect to experience communication from Christ?

John 10:26-27, I think, leaves no doubt on the subject. Jesus said directly, without any ambiguity, that those who believe are his sheep, and those sheep can and do hear his voice.

Hearing the Voice of the Shepherd

Christ's statement should preclude any problems with the concept, but a decent portion of the church has been laboring for centuries (since the Reformation anyhow) under an erroneous teaching that claims that believers cannot and should not expect to hear Jesus' voice. That thought arises from an overextension of “Sola Scriptura,” positing that we have the written word and that is the only communication we need. Of course, that leaves countless numbers living before Gutenberg and all the believers living in non-literate cultures with no "voice" at all.

Justin Peters, famous for his "discernment ministry," has quipped “If you want to hear from God, read your Bible. If you want to hear Him audibly, read it out loud." Clever perhaps, but merely fencing with a straw man, for Jesus wasn’t referring to an actual audible voice anymore than believers are actual sheep. Believers who say they want to hear from God are not looking for an audible voice, at least not the vast majority, rather they're looking for an experience of spiritual communication. So Peters’ quip is just silliness.

Jesus did not say that his sheep understand the Bible, even through Holy Spirit illumination, but that they hear his voice. Although it is true that the word used for "hear" (ἀκούουσιν) can mean understand, its combination with the word "voice" (φωνῆς) in the phrase makes it clear that a sensory experience was in view by Christ. This was not a statement about the Bible, it was a statement about an experience. Since "hear" was in the indicative active, I take the force of this as meaning that if it is now, his sheep are hearing his voice.

Jesus referred to the natural, physical experience of hearing in real time to describe what would have to be the supernatural, spiritual experience of perceiving him communicating to believers in real time. The conclusion, it seems to me, is that Jesus has a way of affecting those that believe in him sensorially, and those believers have a way of understanding those impressions and responding to such. Should we expect to experience Jesus communicating with us? Absolutely!

It is clear that Jesus was NOT talking about his sheep getting something out of the Bible, though they absolutely do, but of experiencing him communicating to us.

Definitionally, at least according to Jesus, a believer is someone whom Jesus is communicating with, and who discerning that communication as from Christ, acts upon it by accompanying him. English texts generally translate the Greek verb (ἀκολουθοῦσίν) as, “follow” rather than "accompany," as they do in just about every instance of this word in the Greek New Testament. Does that matter? It could.

When we think of the word follow, we don’t think of “accompany.” We think of something more akin to baby ducklings following their mama, or rats following the Pied Piper. Is that what Jesus meant? No! A Greek lexicon readily demonstrates the nuanced point: he meant that those hearing believers came to and hung out with him-- going where he went, doing as he did. It's the very picture of his disciples, whom Jesus called "friends" rather than mere followers.

Being a believer is being sensitive to the impression of Jesus' communication and responding to it by walking with him in it.

It means hearing his voice. Does that describe you?

Ways the Voice of Jesus Impresses Us

I think the bottom line of John 10:27 is clear: believers will be guided by sensible impressions from the Lord. Really, there's nothing new in that, God had been impressing people for as long as people had been around. Of course, that kind of thing wasn't widespread before Christ came, only a small, exclusive company ever had the privilege of hearing God's voice. The new thing since Christ came is that Jesus put this "hearing from God" in inclusive terms-- every believer will hear.

In other words, Jesus gave a new definition to the word “believer.” Jesus said that if one is a believer in Christ, that one will receive the guidance of impressions from Jesus and would follow after him as a result. So how do we experience these impressions so we can follow? There is no way to touch on all the possibilities, so let me give but a few examples, just so we get the idea.

Nudges: good shepherds know how to talk using a staff. The staff of our Shepherd is felt via unshakable, strengthening convictions. In these situations we just know we’re not supposed to go that way, but this. Like Paul being prevented from preaching in Asia.

Dawnings: sometimes the voice is a sudden awareness or understanding rising up within us. Like Peter’s confession of Christ, the Son of the Living God.

Stirrings: the voice can cause a flutter or burning of heart. Like the disciples on the road to Emmaus.

Revelations: the voice can drop sudden knowledge into our awareness of what one would not know otherwise as it did for Paul on a ship bound to sink.

Visions: the voice can be communicated in the midst of a vision as in Acts 9:10-12; 10:10-20; & 18:9-10.

Visitations: like Christ to the upper room or on the road to Damascus.

There are those who don’t believe in such things anymore. They are doomed to live spiritually parsimonious lives not knowing their very nature as believers promises so much more. Those who do believe the Good Shepherd still leads by impressing his voice upon the believer so they can follow find companionship walking with the Lord.

On a cautious note, there are some issues. The individual's subjectivity and credulity can lead to hearing the voice in what isn't. 

What Does It Mean to Be Totally Depraved?

The one point that Calvinism and Arminianism agree upon is that humankind is totally depraved. It sounds like an incredibly harsh judgment against the creature, one that is not apparent, particularly, when looking at individual cases. This description, however, is not meant to suggest that everyone is as "bad" as they could possibly be, but to describe their spiritual condition in relation to God. In a nutshell, this characterization refers to the disabling brokenness that sin and death has caused to human nature since Adam's fall.

When Adam forsook God and was justifiably cursed by him, his innate connection to God was broken and his physical being was stricken with death. Adam was cast from the presence of God (the place where God walked) and frustrated in his relationship to the biosphere and with others of his kind (Eve to start). The individual became an island unto himself (so necessarily sinful) with no ability to get back to God, nor to truly understand and relate to him nor, for that matter, to do so with his fellow human (as seen from Jesus' high-priestly prayer). Locked in a self-absorbed prison of death and decay separated from God, debauchery ensued. If God did not initiate contact with humans, no contact, no interest, no desire would be forthcoming from Adam's kind.

Hopefully, it is evident that humankind's depravity should not be seen as something that renders humankind incapable, even in their depraved state, of responding to the interjection of God. God showing up in a way that can be responded to is sufficient in itself to break any barrier that would have kept fallen, natural man in the dark concerning God. Such is demonstrated over and over again throughout biblical history (e.g. Noah, Abram, Moses, etc.). To posit a theory in which God has to fix the depraved human being (i.e. regeneration) before that one can respond to him is unnecessary and not validated by scripture.

The truth is that what makes humans depraved in the first place is a lack of God in their lives. People are depraved in that they are like God (i.e. in his image) but are apart from and without God who's presence is what makes that image work properly. In their depravity, they have no desire to have God (as he truly is) in their lives. What they need they neither discern nor want. When God comes near in the mysterious ways that the Holy Spirit can, that lack is addressed at least to the level that the fallen human is able to see, hear, and respond to what wasn't there before. None of this requires any change in their nature and none is ever mentioned throughout the biblical record.

Human beings always had and have always maintained since the Fall the spiritual capacity to recognize God. That capacity was not such that it could independently discover God or engage him on the basis of executing that capacity in and of itself. God's direct intervention is necessary for each and every human being to come to know and understand him and his ways, but upon that divine intervention, awareness of what we otherwise would not have been aware becomes possible. However, if Adam in all of his pristine purity and perfection could ignore and forsake divine connectedness, than so can all his depraved sons and daughters.

Even the best amongst humankind is totally depraved, broken beyond their ability to help themselves--and yet even the most depraved among us can respond to the gracious visitation of the Holy Spirit. Depravity will continue to be an issue for us until Christ returns and our old dead, depraved natures are done away with once and for all, and new nature completely like unto Christ's is put in their place. That, of course, is predicated upon turning to Christ now. So let me ask you, have you responded to the Holy Spirit drawing you to Christ yet?

Faith In the Authority of Christ

The central core of Christian faith is it's understanding of Jesus-- in particular, its understanding of his authority. Jesus is recorded asking people, "Do you believe I can do this?" Believers recognized his authority, whereas unbelievers disdainfully asked him, "By what authority do you do this?" That range of opinion represents a nice metric for which to measure the concept of effective faith. 

So what does it take for faith to be effective? The moment effective faith comes into existence is explored in other blog offerings on this site. With this article I approach the subject from a different tack and offer the following postulates, which I believe characterize true faith and which I believe faith must exhibit in order to be effective. In other words, they limn out what is means to believe in Jesus in a way that counts.

1) Effective faith perceives Jesus as the Lord (i.e. the ultimate authority in one's life)
2) Effective faith sees all authority in heaven and earth as given to Jesus
3) Effective faith recognizes that the name of Jesus represents the highest authority
4) Effective faith accepts Jesus' word as enduring in it's authority.

Whether we are talking about salvation or about miracles, faith that produces the desired end is faith that fully embraces the authority of Christ.

By the authority Christ granted to them to use, the apostles healed the sick and cast out demons. When they were shaky about that authority, they couldn't cast out a demon and were rebuked for a lack of faith. By that authority Peter walked upon the water, but when Peter became fuzzy about it he sank into the waves. Apprehending the authority of Christ is the difference between praying hopefully and commanding forcefully.

I wish clarity regarding this was my constant experience, but alas, it isn't. There are moments when the authority of Christ is so clear to me, and at those moments, awesome things happen. Then there are those moments when it's only theory in my head, which I assent to readily, but it's not singular or instant. I have to think about it before its crystal clear. The difference between one and the other is command and request, knowing and hoping.

I wish faith wasn't so elusive. 

Would any of us even break through to effective faith if it wasn't for the Spirit's inspiration? In regard to salvation the answer is any easy "no!" In regard to the miraculous, it's little more complex. By God's design, however, the task of believing in either regard is ours. Jesus died in our place, but God won't believe in our place, we have to. That is what makes faith so slippery. 

God has no doubts about who's in charge. When we're certain as well, our experience erupts into a faith moment. Could you do with more faith moments where you're crystal clear, instantly, about the authority of Christ? I know I sure could. Trees would be flying! But while they remain anchored to the soil, the only real question that matters is, "Who's the boss?" Faith answers, "Jesus Christ."

The Faith Moment: Charismata

How does one find the faith to do miracles? There aren't any mountains or mulberry trees flying by, so one would think that kind of faith is extremely rare. Nigh unto impossible to muster, one might assume, but miracles do happen and much more frequently than would be expected given the apparent lack of that quantity Jesus called a "mustard seed". So the faith to do miracles does arise, and broadly enough to make it worth asking ourselves how we might get it.

It seems to me, the moment that faith to do miracles arises is similar to that in which the faith unto salvation arises. Although not strictly necessary in the case of the miraculous (remember the Centurion), for the most part, I think the impetus of God is required for faith to distill. But also like that salvation moment, the final disposition of faith must come through us, not God. We believe, God does not believe for us, even though his instigation is what inspires it. Truly, there is nothing irresistible about the grace that stirs true faith into being.

Now there is a charismatic gift of faith through which faith is clearly inspired by God in the individual for the benefit of the body. That occurs for a specific purpose at a particular time--it is not ongoing, which is according to the intrinsic nature of a manifestation (phanerosis) of the Spirit. Yet, even this inspiration, like anything else the Spirit inspires, is quenchable. We are not puppets in the hand of God, after all, that would insult the one in whose image we are made.

When the breath of God is exhaled across the face of our inner person a moment arises--a moment which awakens faith and calls us to possibilities of moving as the hand of God in the miraculous. That stirring of the Spirit is a grace-filled invitation to believe and move with God. It's that tap on the shoulder we need to get beyond ourselves and get on board with God and do the miraculous.

The Faith Moment: Salvation

How does faith congeal in the soul to become substance? 

I do not believe that God secretly presses a button he's concealed within us, which when pressed, makes us people of persevering faith. As I understand it, that is precisely what Calvinism proposes. The problem with that is that if God did do that kind of thing for any person, he'd do it for all people. Scriptures are clear that is not the way things turn out, so Calvinism's view of efficacious grace cannot be consistent with the self-revelation of God in them. 

God has made mankind with the capacity for faith, of that there can be little doubt, for people everywhere trust in things they cannot see. I think this general capacity is what separates mankind from angels, particularly in regard to redeemability. Mankind was made in innocence, really ignorance, and therefore was made for faith. Faith exists in that gap produced by unseens and unknowns, but Angels were made for knowledge and sight. 

When angels rebelled they did so in knowledge and sight and are irredeemable as a result (see Hebrews 6:4a for the concept as it applies to mankind). If Romans 12:3 applies broadly to all humanity (as I've always taken it to mean) rather than just the church (as Calvinists in particular take it), then God has in fact dealt each person at least some measure of faith. Of course, true faith, faith that actually has an effect, requires that it be placed in the right object, namely, God and God alone. That means that God has to "show up" for that faith to spark into existence.

God "showing up" is that enablement without which no one could truly believe. But God, regardless of what help he gives us, isn't going to believe for us (which is what irresistible grace is tantamount to in my mind). All of his commands to us to believe would be nonsensical in that case. No, it is we who must trust in God, that is our God-enabled responsibility.  

We are called to faith, it is the very currency of heaven. On their own, humans can only answer that call with something less than true faith in the actual God. However, when the Holy Spirit brings our focus on the person and authority of Christ into clarity, the moment is ripe for salvivic faith to be born. It is not guaranteed, as is attested to by Israel's example and the fact that not everyone comes to faith since Jesus was lifted up on the cross, but is only possible then and impossible otherwise.

Nonetheless, thank God that the Holy Spirit is sent to bring us to that moment--the faith moment, when everything comes together and Jesus is seen as Savior and Lord.

Stirred not Shaken

What would it take for you to act upon an impression that you thought might be the Holy Spirit? If absolute certainty is your threshold, you will never move upon any inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Even if your condition to act is merely that you have to apply thoughtful consideration before acting (that seems wise, right?), anything that is of an urgent nature, i.e. that requires an immediate response, will never be done either. We can easily undermine our experience of things spiritual and miraculous in the name of caution and prudence. 

Things of the Spirit (pneumatikos) are anything but certain. According to Christ, it takes faith to cast out demons, heal the sick, and move mountains. In the realm of things the Spirit inspires, there is a gap between what is and what could be that only faith can fill. If we are not willing to strike out in faith on the basis of an inspiration, call it a holy hunch, we will never experience the kinds of supernatural things that are mentioned throughout the New Testament.

Substituting our judgment for the Holy Spirit's is not prudence or wisdom, nor is it faithful--what it is, is a surefire way to quench the Holy Spirit and live a life without the miraculous.

It is a misapprehension to think that a lightning bolt from heaven would strike (or something nigh unto it) if you were meant to heal the sick, or speak a prophetic word, or exercise power against an unclean spirit. Not many, if any, of us are ever going to experience anything like that! Jesus didn't experience that, Peter didn't experience that, and Paul didn't experience that. Elijah learned the hard way not to expect to. 

We need sensitivity to the intimate voice of God within us to catch the stirring of the Spirit.

When God's whisper falls on our "ear", we have to act in faith or we'll miss the opportunity to do a greater work. If that happens, something Jesus went to the cross and ascended into heaven to make possible ends up being missed entirely. We are not meant to live satisfied with the Cessationist's paltry gospel, which is little more than an academic exercise in criticism, history and philosophy that devolves into endless debates over the meanings of words. What we are called to be is powerful witnesses of Christ to the world after that the Holy Spirit comes upon us. 

The Holy Spirit has a way of making himself heard to the hearing ear. To those that have one, much more will be given. To those who turn a deaf ear to God the Spirit, what could have been theirs is lost, like a fruitful field of grain that went unharvested. We're partnered with God, someone we can absolutely trust. When that hunch that might be the Holy Spirit stirs within, we must take faith in hand and act or we'll lose the opportunity.

James Bond, despite his iconic instruction concerning his taste in spirits, would be dead wrong in the realm of the Spirit: it's always better to be stirred, not shaken.

I Was in the Spirit

John uses the expression, "I was in the Spirit" twice in the Apocalypse. Once at 1:10, and once at 4:2. That he was referring to the same state of experience both times could hardly be argued against. What that state was we are about to explore, though it is not explicitly developed in the text. The sort of thing it results in, on the other hand, was explicitly demonstrated throughout the Revelation.

In both instances, the phrases are exactly the same in Koine. On their face, they refer to a locus in or among the Spirit. In the way that one can be "in the wind" or even "in the sun", the Apostle John was in the Spirit. What he is communicating by this was that he was experiencing a pointed (and I would say virtually tangible) consciousness of the divine presence.

This was not John's common or moment-to-moment experience of the Spirit. There are clear enough references to the inception of the experience in both occurrences. In the first usage, this something special happened to occur one Sunday on Patmos. In the second usage, the condition was initiated immediately upon hearing the voice beckoning him to heaven. In both cases, it seems clear that the experience as recorded represented a change from what was going on before.

The word used [ginomai] to describe the existence of John's state packs within it the idea of "becoming" rather than simply being. In other words, John emerged into this state (really, was born into it) at the moment in reference. It is not described in trance-like terms, though the word "ecstasy" is often bandied about while commenting on it. It is ridiculous to do so in my mind, for John betrays no rapture, no enthusiasm, no exhilaration nor any euphoria in conjunction with this experience. Really, there is nothing but matter-of-fact reportage associated with it.

More than anything else the state of being in the Spirit, at least from the accounts of John's being so, is about awareness of the very presence of God--not theoretically, not by faith, but in actuality. If we can generalize from John's experience to any of our's (and I think we can), being in the Spirit is like having a light go on in the dark which suddenly reveals things one would otherwise be unaware of. Those things could be revelations regarding heaven or earth or about the activity of God in a moment past, present or future.

If there is anything precedential or paradigmatic about John's experience, I think it can be said in regard to its application to us, that coming to be in the Spirit (really, acting on charismatic distinctives) is about coming to an acute awareness of God's immediate presence and what he is up to. As a result of that awareness prophecy, or healings, or works of power, or miracles are then manifested in this world. Those manifestations do not break into existence because someone exercised enough faith to produce them, but because someone had come to be in the Holy Spirit.

Worship As Fellowship

"...I am like a green olive tree in the house of God; I trust in the lovingkindness of God forever and ever. I will give You thanks forever, because You have done it. And I will wait on your name, for it is good, in the presence of Your godly ones.   Psalm 52:8-9  NASB

Psalm 52 is a study in contrasts. It begins looking at the evil person (as summarized in v. 7) and ends looking at the faithful, godly one. The boasts of the two are contrasted, as is their desire, their faith, and the reaction they get from God. A remarkable feature of the godly one is that he gets to hang out in the presence of God with other godly ones and worship. Worship as fellowship, imagine that!

Worship is fellowship with God

The faithful one is cast as a green olive tree in the house of God. That would seem a rather passive symbol, but there's much to recommend it. It is green, which means it is full of vitality. It is a tree, so its place is its place of abiding--trees don't come and go--it dwells in God's presence. It is an olive tree which means its fruitfulness provides oil which produces both sustenance and light.

An olive tree planted in the Temple grounds is in the happy situation of dwelling in the light of God. There it flourishes as a result of hanging out in the presence of God. It has abundant life flowing within and productive life blossoming and ripening without. It is alive as live can be, resting in the lovingkindness of God, but is there any action? 

Yes, there is--praising. "I will give you thanks" (as in the NASB above) would probably be bettered rendered as "I will praise you" (as in the NIV). The Hebrew word underlying the English translation comes from a root which means "casting" or "throwing" and which came to be used figuratively of the act of praising. In worship we cast our thanks, we cast our wonder, and we cast our submission to or upon God. 

When the faithful one is fellowshipping with God, planted like a tree in his presence, that one showers God with love and gratitude. Not a surprising response, given the wonder of who God is, it could hardly be helped. To fellowship with God is to break out in praise. Maybe we could jump to the conclusion and say by extension: to truly worship is to fellowship with God.

Worship is fellowship with God's people

That green tree planted in the temple of God is not alone. Others are present as well, godly people looking to God. Praise can be done alone, but is not something reserved for solitude. As for the individual, so too for the group: faithful people in the presence of God can hardly keep from breaking forth in praise. To truly worship in congress is to fellowship with God and man.

I think our fellowship with one another is missing something without genuine worship being part of our shared experience. Not all of our fellowship has to be centered around worship, but it is a dynamic that is healthy for us as individuals and as a body. Together, we are the temple of God. Worship is our fellowship.

Worship as a Response to God

Like all things truly spiritual, worship doesn't have its source in the innate goodness or wisdom of the human being. Would mankind even have a notion to worship, let alone worship along the lines God desired, without some impetus from God? I don't think so. True worship, as I see it, is something that results from the Spirit's input into the sons and daughters of Adam's race.

"Then Moses and Aaron went and assembled all the elders of the sons of Israel; and Aaron spoke all the words which the Lord had spoken to Moses. He then performed the signs in the sight of the people. So the people believed; and when they heard that the Lord was concerned about the sons of Israel and that He had seen their affliction, then they bowed low and worshiped."   Exodus 4:29-31 NASB

Worship is inspired by hearing God's word. Faith is inspired along the same lines: it makes sense that worship would be part of the package. When the Holy Spirit attends the Word of God, so that the human can hear it with perception, understanding dawns on that person and response to God's word becomes possible. Faith is the primary, necessary and effective response, worship is the consequential one.

It is not the mere fact or existence of God's word which elicits a response, but the content. A later prophet would seem to rely on the same factor. When the Holy Spirit attends the Word of God which reveals that God has plans for people, plans to prosper them and not harm them, people touched by the message respond. Among other possibilities, they worship.

Followers of Jesus have such words from God. Since they are, by definition, spiritual people capable of spiritual appraisals, Christians would be expected to be people who exude worship in response to such promises. Christians unmoved to worship, Christians unresponsive worshipfully to God's goodness, or Christians unbowed before the mighty and merciful God would seem a contradiction in terms. Christians who don't worship might not be Christians at all.

Worship finds inspiration in the acts of God as well. The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ are perhaps the most notable among the acts of God, but they are not the only ones that inspire worship. Past acts other than those, and present acts serve to inspire worship too. Any act of God that communicates that God is with us, that God is for us, and that he has seen our misery and is concerned for us inspire those that believe to bow down in worship.

When one hears God's words of concern and promise and sees God's acts of deliverance and blessing, and believes, worship in response to God is practically automatic. So, listen to the words of God and see his acts of wonder and let a reaction rise within you and spill out as worship.

Windows Into the Mind of God

How does God, with all his "omni" characteristics, think? We don't know, really, and can never know in this lifetime. We project upon him how we think, because it's the only approximation we have, but God has told us he doesn't think like we do. So, that doesn't really get us anywhere. Not being God ourselves, there is, in truth, no way for us to get inside the black box and see for ourselves.

Creation can clue us into the nature of God's power and his personal attributes analytically, even if invisible, but it cannot begin to unveil the thought processes involved in producing it. All we really have to go on in knowing the mind of God is a spattering of self-revelatory snippets scattered throughout his Word. Despite the fact that we are reflective of God (we're in his image), our suppositions and even educated guesses are of little help in gaining any insight into the mind of God because we have no "omni" characteristics. Any comparisons tend to be of the apples and oranges sort.

When we do extrapolate the results end up just plain weird. For instance, when we consider God's omniscience and his immutability and extrapolate to picture the mind of God, we can come up with some very strange constructs about what God's mind "must" be like. It is possible to conclude that God is incapable of making a decision, of forming an intention or otherwise acting mentally, because that would require a change in knowledge. Is that what God is really like?

Not at all! God's revelation in his Word blows such considerations out of the water. He made a decision to create "before" which he was not related to creation, after which he was. Change! He made a choice to interact with Abraham, thus becoming his God, before which he wasn't, after which he was. Change! He admits to having to see some things in order to know them. Change, at the very least, in regard to creation!

God reaches conclusions, God regrets, God is grieved, God becomes angry and has his anger placated. We can pass these things off as anthropomorphisms and extrapolate to utter weirdness, or we can accept these revelations as windows into the mind of God. I think that is what they were intended to be. Our LORD is not static, his "omni" characteristics don't reduce him to an all-knowing, all-seeing, ever unchanging amorphous blob. He does things which intrinsically necessitate change, even though he does not change, at least not in terms of who or what he is.

Indestructible Souls and Irresistible Grace

"Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being."     Genesis 2:7 (NASB)

The breath of God is a precious thing.

God's breath imparts that something that makes a human soul, that makes one a person. Not that every person animated by that breath is the person of God, but it is God's breath that infuses all of the capacities of soul that personhood builds on and without which there would be no person. It communicates those characteristics of personhood that are analogous to God's personhood. That breath is spirit, and more than anything else in all creation represents something directly emanated from God's being. 

Think about that: something within humans that makes them persons represents a direct input from the person of God. Some repercussions of that astounding fact are easily enough perceived--humans exercise choice (freewill), are creative (even to the extant of bringing something out of nothing), love, and... wait for it... humans are eternal. Once God invested his own breath in humanity, the persons that result have an essence that will never pass away. What an astonishing thought!

God's breath may exist eternally, but that does not translate into those infused by that breath living eternally. Breath that is separated from God does not respire, it does not go out and come in (as it were). God's breath must be actively with God, in tune with God, in contact with and in the presence of God to live. Cut off from God, separated, it merely exists. It projects some measure of its capacity for personhood, but it is dark, really, lifeless.

In order for one in whom God has breathed the breath of life to live, he or she must walk in agreement with God; however, even God cannot make creatures who possess his image but who do not exercise creaturely freedom thereby. His image makes such freedom necessary and irresistible grace impossible. Creatures made in God's image, by the capacity of choice in that nature, must freely choose agreement with God. That is an action of faith (i.e. trustful reliance) without which it is impossible to please God--faith is what it takes for free creatures to live in agreement with God.

Whereas it is very true that God loves everyone he's made, those made in his image with the capacity of choice have no future without faith. The Gordian knot is that no one born since the Fall of Man can make that choice of faith unless the Spirit has enabled him or her. However, if the enablement was such that one was rewired to make that choice without the possibility of not making it, that one would cease being in the image of God. The breath that confers such is indestructible, so it is impossible for the grace that underlies enablement to be irresistible and enablement to be a guarantee.

Worship: Express Yourself

We have been following a map, though I haven't mentioned it yet, while exploring the subject of worship. Our journey has brought us through Pause, Repent, Arise, Inhale, Sing, and ends with this article concerning Express. In discovering how we might be those worshippers that God seeks, hopefully, we've learned how to P-R-A-I-S-E (at least anagrammatically) in the process.

Praise the Lord. Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise in the assembly of his faithful people. Let Israel rejoice in their Maker; let the people of Zion be glad in their King. Let them praise his name with dancing and make music to him with timbrel and harp. For the Lord takes delight in his people; he crowns the humble with victory.         Psalm 149:1-4 (NIV)

Upon finding ourselves in the presence of God, accepted, there builds within us something that wants to be let out. It's a feeling that wells up, but which isn't really what it is until it gets out. If it is squelched, hindered, or hidden, it doesn't get to be what it really is. For it to be before God what it is meant to be, what it should be, it needs to be expressed (maybe Charles Wright was on to something back in 1970).

The text above gives us a little direction in letting that something out--in expressing ourselves in worship. Suffice it to say, worship is more than a mere mental exercise; our bodies and our voices must be engaged as well. All we are as people should be brought to bear upon expressing worship. If we take these pointers to heart, and embrace their practice, we'll be well on our way to truly praising the Lord.

Picking up on a point from the last article, something new is called for when we worship. The inference in the word "new" is something spontaneous, something that hasn't been established before. Biblical worship will express something new, something spontaneous. If all that we do in our attempt to worship is the tried and true, we may look nice or sound great, but will not actually cross the threshold of worship (so much for liturgy and precisely planned worship orders!).

Being aware of our acceptance in the presence of God is not something that can be carried without emotion. Relief and gratitude are the seeds of gladness and joy. Worship is not an austere endeavor stiffened in structure, but is a fountain of joy, splashing, gushing, getting everything it touches wet and messy. Worship should express the joy and gladness of being at one with God and will of necessity be emotionally expressive.

And there is more to musically accompanied praise than just singing. We, ourselves, can be instruments, as well as playing instruments or having instruments played. We dance, play timbrils and harps (strings), and sing. As long as I am a pastor, any flock I shepherd will be a place that welcomes expressions of musical participation from the congregation: the folk will be welcome to break out in dance, be encouraged to clap and shake a tambourine, or even let out a shout. The only underlying principle is that is must be toward God, other than that, folk should express themselves in worship.

Though such a thing may seem disorderly to some folk's way of thinking, this is not fleshly or worldly, nor out of place--it's scriptural. It may be noisy and emotional, and even a bit messy, but it is exactly what God is looking for. History cannot tell us how to worship, only the scriptures and the Holy Spirit can. If our practice gives mere lip service to what the scripture says and the Spirit stirs, then our practice isn't worth the effort it takes, even if we've done it that way for thousands of years.

There is, in fact, a "why" to all these going-ons. It is because we are accepted favorably in God's presence--we are approved, even delighted in by God. After all, we are not the ones setting the example here, God is! There is joy in the presence of angels (meaning God, not the angels, is filled with joy over repentant sinners).

If God is filled with joy, singing over the redeemed, how can they not reflect back that same sentiment toward him? God is get-off-your-seat-and-dance-happy over bringing us forgiven into his presence, why would we be any less? Things rub off on us in the presence of God. Expressive praise of the sort we've been talking about is one of those things.

My Theological Presuppositions

Presuppositions are those predispositions, even prejudices, that we come to the examination of any new knowledge already possessing, which affect our interpretation of that knowledge. In other words, we have some ideas about things which act as givens as we build understanding of new things. We can be unaware that we possess them and incognizant of how they color our understanding of things. We even have presuppositions about God, which affect our interpretation, acceptance or, God forbid, rejection of scripture.

I am no different than anyone else in this regard. My experiences and exposures, reactions to and ruminations upon life before the Bible was in the picture color the picture of God painted after I encountered him in the scriptures. For instance, I can remember, long before I was saved, walking down my street as a twelve year old on a sunny, breezy day, when something about the color and shape and way the leaves were fluttering on a maple tree struck me with the intense conviction that there had to be an intelligent, creator God. Prior to that, I didn't think there was one, but regardless, it was not the Bible that informed that new supposition.

That experience led me to reach out to God, to attempt the occasional talk with him, even though reading the Bible was the furthest thing from my mind. I would ask the "God out there" on those occasions about things, and I took the sudden inspirations that followed in my mind as responses from him. Sometimes, the inspirations came apart from any question on my part. I believed I was learning about God from God, even though I was fifteen before I understood who Jesus truly was (that's another story), and 19 before I started reading the Bible in any serious measure.

Sadly, it was actually some time from the moment I knew who Jesus was until I was willing to drop it all and follow him (a bit over 5 years). In my very first days of actually following Jesus, I had an encounter with him in my bedroom that left an impression on me that I'm still under. My experiences, before and after, have left me with with some presuppositions concerning God that (even though these convictions existed before I began to study the Bible) have proven serviceable in the time since when I've been studying the Bible.

Let me share some with you...

We can personally interact with God. God speaks to us today, not just to folks a long time ago in a culture far, far away.

Jesus Christ is the only visible God we will ever see--God in the flesh. The Father and Spirit are incorporeal and never will be discernible through the auspices of electromagnetic radiation (though they may choose to affect the visual realm). Jesus is the only means of knowing God and to know him is to know God.

The Bible is the infallible Word of God, preserved to us inerrant by God's oversight. It was inspired by God, not created by men. If we want to know with confidence what God wants to do in our lives, the Bible is the only place to look.

Freedom of will is the essential distinction between humanity and all other creatures. It is entailed in being made like unto God and is necessary to choice, purpose, and love. Eternity will not result in an abrogation of free will but in the harmonization of it with that of God.

Do you know what some of your presuppositions concerning God are? Have they proven serviceable or a hindrance in your journey with Christ?

Tempting the Christian

Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’” The serpent said to the woman, “You surely will not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.    Genesis 3:1-7 NASB

Can one generalize from the Serpent's action in Eden the Devil's technique in tempting those who are in relationship with God now? Perhaps so, let's have a look and see.

Note that between Adam and Eve, the Serpent targeted Eve for temptation--did he see her as the weakest link? If he did, I don't think it had anything to do with her created nature, but I do think it was possible that she did not have direct instructions from God concerning that singular prohibition in the Garden. We know Adam received it straight from the source, and Eve may have too, but it isn't recorded if she did. If she did, she must have gotten slightly different instructions than did Adam, for she added the extra warning, "or touch it", to the proscription Adam had received in her response to the Serpent's question.

I can't imagine God giving them different instructions, so I'm led to the conclusion that Eve probably heard the rule second hand from Adam. Perhaps he, trying to be extra cautious or even just incautiously paraphrasing, added the "do not touch" provision when he passed it on to Eve. There are reasons we are warned not to add to nor subtract from the word God speaks to those he choses to entrust his word to (e.g. Moses, Proverbs, John). Adding to God's word, it seems to me, gave the Devil the opportunity to undermine what God actually did say.

Which brings us to the Devil's technique. He began his assault by attempting to becloud God's word. To what was clear and straightforward (even if indirect for Eve), he attempted to inject doubt into, to raise issues of subtleties and nuance about. His aim was obfuscating the word of God. When a child of God is in the position of uncertainly questioning what exactly God said, that one is off balance and susceptible to the further deceit of the evil one.

Then he went after God's character. When it comes to God, faith is everything. Faith not only believes that God is (Adam and Eve had "sight" in that area), it also believes that God is good and fair, one who reliably rewards us. When the Devil tempted Eve, he sought to cast aspersions on God's motivations, to accuse God of petty selfishness, of holding out on Adam and Eve. When a person is the least bit shaky on the trustworthiness and goodness of God, they are nothing more than a wobbling boxer, set to go down by any blow from Satan.

Then the Devil appealed to the flesh. Christians, I think, often expect the attack of the Devil to start with the flesh, but I think Christians in good stead with the Holy Spirit are generally prepared for such frontal assaults. However, fog up the word, call the character of God into question, and suddenly the flesh is much more vulnerable to attack. What looks tasty and feels good, what appeals to pride (like being in the know), what promises power are the sources of itchiness flesh unrestrained by faith can't resist scratching.

If you are a follower of Christ, one who is a companion to and child of God, you will be assaulted by the enemy of your soul. Hopefully, this examination of the Devil's techniques might help you foresee, forestall and resist his temptation.

Only Jesus Lives

Only God lives. Nothing else has this quality in and of itself. Everything other than God borrows its derivative existence from him, regardless of whether it may be animate or inanimate. Therefore, no being other than God has any claim to personal life (i.e a right to live) or personal rights (i.e. it's my life, I can do with it as I want). We have not made ourselves and we do not exist by and of independent animus.

In the grand scheme of things, only that which is precisely within God's will, that is in agreement in thought and deed with him, can possibly live. If anything in opposition to him had the ability to maintain itself in such, that would prove that evil was actually in God, since ultimately only God is. That which is in opposition to God, cannot do so eternally, but only temporarily and only because there is purpose in it for a season. Evil is a vanishing mist.

Among those in flesh and bones, only Jesus lived precisely in God's will. He never strayed from that line, and never will. It is his chief demonstration of divinity, and it is backed-up by his resurrection from the dead. So among those in flesh and bones, only Jesus has life and knows how to live.

For any other being made in the image of God, life can only exist in being in Jesus. This "being in Jesus" is not merely a positional or theoretical conception, but an actual and active participation in his Spirit. The one in Jesus is recast in his image, and thereafter walks as he walks. His atonement may have been the means of getting a sinner out of death, but only living and walking in him, like him, can sustain life.

As Jesus is flesh and bones with the person of God dwelling in him, those that will live are flesh and bones with God's Spirit living in them. As he, humbled in the form of flesh, lived agreeably with his heavenly Father, so to will those that live walk humbly in their flesh agreeably with the Spirit of God. To have Jesus within is to live, to be without Jesus is death, because only Jesus lives.

All This Talk About Vision

God speaks to people about what he will have them do. Today. He hasn't changed.

The experience of such would be called a vision, even if it wasn't something optically perceived. It seems funny to me, but everyone in the church world is all about vision these days, even if they are blatant cessationists (thanks for nothing Peter Drucker).

When a man or woman of God has an ambition or dream, ostensibly inspired by God in some way, they labor to put together all the pieces necessary to accomplish it. He or she puts up a target, and then pushes and pulls, moves and shakes, and out comes...

...a calf. These may (and I only say that by concession) not be our golden gods, but at the very least, they are our bronze serpents. The truth is that they are our Ishmaels.

The church world has so thoroughly embraced the strategic management techniques used in the world, that though the product resulting from this kind of vision may be accurately consumer-driven, it is about as far away from the model described in the manual as sand castles are from real ones. Since this kind of vision is the product of human imagination, in what way can it be said to be a vision from God? For that matter, would God even bother to give us a vision if the thing we were endeavoring to accomplish could be achieved by human ingenuity in the normal course of affairs? The results of these managerial efforts never produce Isaacs, and can never measure up to the model in the heavens.

When God does grant a vision to a person, it is not like he places an order with that person, or is commanding that one to accomplish the thing shown. The vision is a demonstration or a display, really a sneak preview, of what is coming to pass. He doesn't give us visions for us to figure out how to make it so, he gives us visions of what is he is bringing forth. Generally, they are beyond any possibility of us making them so anyhow, and they only come about by the most unusual and bizarre of circumstances.

Our efforts to produce the vision from God instead produce hardship. They result in Ishmaels which strive against all men. They result in the trashing of those who can't "keep up," the disdain of those less perceiving, and the exploitation of the blood-bought as if they were mere raw materials. They produce pride and division, and leave heritages of animosity. To hell with such visions!

By contrast, God's efforts to fulfill the vision he shared produce the joy of the Lord. They result in Isaacs, which are pleasant in their surprise, gentle to all, and demonstrate the peaceable fruits of righteousness. They do not trash, belittle, or otherwise relegate to trophy cases the blood-bought and beloved of God. They produce laughter and praise, and leave the sweet savor of heaven behind.

Perhaps it has something of a biblical precedent, all this talk of vision: it leaves a sour taste in my mouth!

Minding Our T's and Clues

The description of the natural man in the Bible is that man is dead because of Adam's transgression. It's not that we are all being held responsible for Adam's sin (i.e. punished), but that his sin happened before we came along and so it's effects (death) were handed down to us. Just as I am American because my distant progenitors decided to leave Ireland and Germany and settle in America and raise a family, so I am a sinner because Adam and Eve sinned and then had children.

The dead beget the dead. It's not like each of us would not have done as Adam did given the chance (he was the prototypical human). We were in his loins, we are as he was. That point is moot, however, because Adam did sin and did so before he had progeny. As a result, all that he could pass on was what he had--death, separation from God, and curse.

It should be noted that after the Fall, Adam's will was still intact and functioning. He was making choices, plotting direction, demonstrating creativity. If anything, those aspects of his personhood may actually have been accentuated. He even had conversations with God. Apparently, the Fall did not turn him into a zombie automaton serving only Satan and sin. I don't see any of the individuals highlighted in the OT demonstrating such a characteristic. Sinners, yes: satanic automatons incapable of hearing and responding to God when he spoke, NO!

Despite that, the Calvinistic concept of depravity (the condition of natural man) is vigorous and all too thorough. According to that reckoning, mankind has been so affected by Adam's sin as to be entirely corrupt and absolutely incapable of any good in regard to God. Man is incapable of searching for God, finding God, responding to God, trusting God, or walking according to his precepts. Man is dead in sin with no residual ability or capacity for anything spiritual.

Under such a reckoning, a divine imposition of grace is necessary for man to even so much as respond to God with faith. Regeneration, for all intents and purposes, must precede faith, and once initiated is irresistible and infallible. It seems to me that this approach has one being saved to believe rather than being saved because one believes.

In Arminianism, the concept of depravity is vigorous and thorough as well. By its reckoning, mankind has been so affected by Adam's sin as to be thoroughly corrupt and absolutely incapable of any untainted good. Man is incapable of searching for God, finding God, or walking according to his precepts. Man is dead in sin, separated from God, corrupt, and therefore incapable of truly having faith in God.

But under such a reckoning, a divine interjection of grace is all that is necessary for mankind is to respond to God with faith. Arminians, generally, see the word of God as containing such an affect. Upon hearing the word of God, the natural man is enabled to respond to God. A response is not infallibly certain, but it is absolutely impossible apart from the grace that enables it.

The chief difference in those two views of man's utter depravity comes into focus when considering the solution either envisions for the problem. Calvinism posits an imposed grace and regeneration (rebirth) as the solution: the sinner is made a saint by divine fiat. Arminianism posits an enabling grace which allows the sinner to respond to God with faith, which in turn is followed by God making the former sinner a new creature (rebirth). In either case, the solution for man's incapacity is divine.

A Summary of Theological Positions Regarding the Spiritual State of Natural Man

Calvinism: God imposes saving faith upon the depraved he chooses to save

Arminianism: God enables the depraved who hear the Gospel to respond with saving faith

Semipelagianism: God savingly helps those who use their ability turn to him in faith

Pelagianism: Man can turn to Christ on his own and appropriate salvation

The Pelagian (semi included) approaches to man's status and ability fly in the face of Jesus words: "no one can come to me unless the Fathers draws them." In maintaining mankind's freewill, they deny the innate inability of natural mankind to initiate a relationship with God through faith (depravity). This, despite the Word clearly teaching that faith comes by hearing the word of God. One does not have to posit intact spiritual abilities in natural man (i.e. little or no affect from the Fall) against what the Word says in order to sustain natural man's freewill.

Where the Calvinistic conception of depravity fails is that the record of scripture shows, readily and repeatedly, that natural man can respond to God when he or his word comes upon them. Sinners are not so "dead" as to be beyond hearing God if he actively approaches near enough, and they are not so quickened in doing so as to be above rejecting him.

Biblical Christianity is Inherently Mystical

Christianity is often analyzed as if it were an issue of philosophy, history or sociology. Some aspects of its doctrine, ecclesiology, or development are subject to such treatment, but it should be realized that such treatment can never actually touch the heart of what it truly is. That is because Christianity, at its core, is not about what a person assents to, what those assenting do together, or what impact they have on society and history. Christianity, at its core, is about what a person experiences in his or her soul.

Biblical Christianity, as practiced by the individual, is inherently mystical. And just so we're on the same page, let me define "mystical" as I am using it in this context. Mystical means that something is experienced, rather than merely known, but which does not have a seen or necessarily understandable genesis or impetus. By that definition, common aspects of Christianity are readily seen as mystical: conviction, faith, call, inspiration, grace all fit the bill.

Take a look at some passages of the Bible:
John 16:7-15                                    
John 6:44-47                                   
John 3:3-8                                    
Romans 12:3
Romans 14:17
Romans 8:3-17
1 Corinthians 2:10-15
1 Corinthians 12:1-13
Galatians 3:2-5
Galatians 5:4-6; 16-25
Ephesians 3:1-19

Anyone who truly believes that Jesus is the Son of God is by definition a mystic. Anyone who believes that they are born again is a mystic. Anyone who believes that God's Spirit enables them to do anything is a mystic. Anyone who believes that they experience the presence of God and have companionship with him is a mystic. Anyone practicing in real life what the Bible describes as life in Christ is a mystic.

Embrace the mystical foundation of Christianity. Christianity cannot be reduced to writing on paper, or even stone. It's written on the heart by God--it is inherently mystical. Do yourself a favor and let your inner mystic out.

The Insufficiency of the Word

I knew cessationist, who, in the name of the sufficiency of scripture, promoted a practice of Christianity that doesn't really resemble what is described in those pages at all. The Word to him is like a book of charts, which by careful use of a trained intellect and skill, can be used to navigate the course of one's life into the will of God. Never does he have a conviction, an inspiration, never a check, a nudge, and certainly never a revelation--he has his mind, the determination of his belief, and a map.

In light of his deterministic outlook, I suppose it doesn't make sense to worry about this, but I cannot see how the concept of regeneration he holds Calvinistically can be consistent with such a view. Regeneration, according to his view (and mine as well for that matter), is necessary, foundational and completely, solely the purview of the Holy Spirit. One would think that something established on the basis of the Holy Spirit communicating something into the human soul would be open to other things being communicated as well, building, as it were, upon the foundation of experience the Holy Spirit laid in regeneration.

But no, apparently something started by the Spirit can be carried on by foreseen and manipulated human effort, at least that is what it appears like to me. Let God stay in the heavens, we have the Scriptures and they are sufficient! But those same scriptures describe the Holy Spirit interactively making what is described in them possible for us to experience. It seems to me that is their point, for instance, note the following passages: Matthew 13:9-17, 1 Corinthians 2, John 15:26-16:15, Galatians 5:13-25, 1 Corinthians 12:13-31.

The Word truly is our all-sufficient rule for faith and practice. But, whereas the Word is sufficient to describe the kind of things Christians can and should do and believe, the Word can never substitute for the experience of the things it describes. It's not enough to talk about spiritual matters, we need to experience the life of the Spirit. In saying that, I am not suggesting that the Word is not important, I merely am saying that we need to understand its importance rightly.

It is not the hearers of the Word that are blessed, but its doers! That is those who experience what it talks about. The Word is there to tell us what we will and can experience in Christ if we believe. We need to act on what we read, AND we need the Holy Spirit communicating his goodness, desire and power into our being so we can. With the scriptures' encouragement, may we, with freedom and boldness, endeavor to do the things described in the book and to do them as led by the Spirit.