GeorgePWood.com

Have you heard of The Rapture Index?

 

It is a webpage run by two Bible-believing Christians named Todd Strandberg and Terry James. The purpose of the index is “to measure the type of activity that could act as a precursor to the rapture.” It does this by assigning numerical value on a daily basis to news reports about false Christs, war, natural disasters, and famine, among other things. The Rapture Index measured 169 on June 30, 2008. The all-time high for the index was 182 on September 24, 2001. The all-time low was 57 on December 12, 1993.

 

What do these numerical values mean? Here’s how Strandberg and James put it:

 

 

Evidently, in light of yesterday’s Rapture Index, California’s seat-belt motto has eschatological significance: Click it or ticket!

 

Christians are a future-oriented people. We “look forward to the day of God and speed its coming”; we are “looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness” (2 Pet. 3:12-13). And, of course, Jesus himself told us that certain “signs” would precede the end of the age: “Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door” (Matt. 24:33). I suppose Jesus’ words are what motivate Strandberg and James to maintain their index.

 

According to Acts 1:6-8, Jesus’ disciples were similarly interested in the timing of end-times events. During the forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension, Luke tells us: “So when they met together, they asked him, ‘Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?’” For the disciples, the restoration of Israel’s kingdom was The Big Event, eschatologically speaking. When that happened, the dead would rise, the righteous would be vindicated, and paradise would be restored.

 

Jesus’ reply to his disciples’ question is interesting. “He said to them: ‘It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.’” God alone knows exactly what the future holds and in what order that future will unfold. We don’t. It’s not our job to figure that stuff out. Rather, our job is to be witnesses of Jesus’ words and deeds to everyone everywhere.

 

Acts 1:8 is the key verse. It describes our priority: missional witness, not eschatological speculation. It demonstrates our need for power from the Holy Spirit. And it delineates a plan of action: from Jerusalem to the ends of the world. Acts tells the story of the church as it carried out its mission in the first-century. It’s our job to do the same in the twenty-first.

 

By the way, the one word you won’t find on the Rapture Index is mission. To me, that’s telling.

Mission is the sixth mark of the church (Rev. 3:7-13).

 

Before Jesus Christ ascended into heaven, he gave his disciples what we now call the Great Commission: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:18–20). This commission consists of three elements: the fact of Christ’s authority, the command to make disciples, and the promise of Christ’s presence.

 

We see the same three elements at work in the letter to the church in Philadelphia.

 

Fact: “The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, who shuts and no one opens.” Jesus Christ is God’s key master, who opens doors of opportunity for his mission-minded followers.

 

Command: “Behold, I have set before you an open door which no one is able to shut.” Although Jesus Christ has the power to shut doors of opportunity in such a way that no one can open them, he does not use that power in his churches. Rather, he only opens doors so that we might “go” and “make disciples.”

 

The church in Philadelphia was providentially prepared to walk through such an open door. John Stott comments: “Philadelphia was situated in a broad and fertile valley which commanded the trade routes in all directions. Sir William Ramsay wrote that the intention of the city’s founder had been to make it a centre for the spread of Greek language and civilization. ‘It was a missionary city from the beginning.’ So it may be that Christ was intending that what Philadelphia had been for Greek culture, it was now to be for the spread of the gospel.”[1]

 

Promise: “I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth.” A missionary church never seeks out conflict with others, but conflict comes to it nevertheless. Wherever the church shares the good news of God’s love, powerful interests oppose it. At the church in Pergamum, that powerful interest was the Roman imperial cult and the ius gladii (“power of the sword”) that enforced it. At the churches in Smyrna and Philadelphia, that powerful interest was the Jewish synagogue, which Jesus refers to as “the synagogue of Satan.”

 

I read those four words with trepidation. Looking backward from Auschwitz at the relationship of Jews and Christians, I see how Gentile Christians used such descriptions to hatefully, wrongfully, and unjustly persecute Jews down the centuries. Such persecution was, is, and always will be a sin. But to understand these words in their historical setting we must remember that Jesus Christ, the letter writer, is a Jew, as is John, his amanuensis. Also, in the first century when Revelation was written, Judaism was a large community of faith but Christianity a small one. Auschwitz is an awful reminder that for centuries Christians persecuted Jews. Philadelphia is a small reminder that for a brief time, persecution flowed in the opposite direction.

 

But if we understand the mission of the church rightly, we will see that persuasion, not persecution, is the way the church of Jesus Christ should accomplish its mission. Christ has set before us an open door to tell others of his love for them. Sometimes, such evangelism will result in conflict. Knowing that Jesus Christ is with us, let us go through the door anyway.

 

---

Perhaps you are ready to concede that the modern church is a sinful one in need of correction. But surely the early church was different! Surely the churches of the apostolic age were exemplary congregations, their holiness refined by the fires of martyr-making persecution!

 

Well, no.

 

With the exception of Smyrna and Philadelphia, Jesus Christ finds something to correct at each of the churches of Roman Asia: Loveless orthodoxy at Ephesus (2:5), heretical teaching at Pergamum (2:14–15), sexual immorality at Thyatira (2:20–23), hypocrisy at Sardis (3:1), and spiritual apathy at Laodicea (3:15–17).

 

The pages of the New Testament are replete with even more examples of the sins and shortcomings of the first-century church. Take Jesus’ handpicked inner circle, for example. The Twelve constantly bickered over their respective positions on the apostolic organization chart (Mark 9:33–37). James and John—nicknamed the “Sons of Thunder”—had anger management issues (Mark 3:17, Luke 9:51–56). Judas stole from the apostolic purse (John 12:6) and betrayed Jesus unto death (Mark 14:10-11, 43–50). Peter denied Christ three times (Mark 14:66–72). Thomas doubted (John 20:24–29).

 

“No church ever existed in a pure state,” writes Eugene Peterson. “The church is made up of sinners. The fleas come with the dog.”[i]

 

In late August 2002, I traveled to northwestern China with my father and several male relatives to visit churches in the cities of Xining, Lanzhou, and Guide. Most likely, you have never heard of those places, but they are a prominent part of my heritage. From the late 1920s to the late 1940s, my grandparents—as well as my great uncle and great aunt—served as missionaries in that region of the world, sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with people who had never heard it. Working with national Christians, they started several churches that, by God’s grace and the skin of their teeth, survived communist persecution and the Cultural Revolution.

 

A driving force in those churches’ survival was Pastor Mung, who has since gone to be with the Lord at the ripe old age of ninety-five. In the face of imprisonment, discrimination, and ill health, Pastor Mung led the church of Xining (and outlying areas) through a long period of growth and spiritual renewal. Because of advancing age, however, he had divided his pastoral responsibilities between two younger colleagues. When my relatives and I entered China, we learned that these two young pastors did not like each other, would not cooperate together, and were allowing their personal animosity to poison the Christian community.

 

The fleas come with the dog indeed.

 

And yet, perhaps there is a note of hope in the recognition that there is no “golden age” of the church, neither in first-century Roman Asia nor twenty-first-century China. The same God who shed grace on those imperfect churches can shed grace on us. He used them to accomplish his will; he can use us too. All that we need to do is “repent” (2:5, 16, 21, 22; 3:3, 19).

 

---

Today is Maundy Thursday. The day derives its name from the “command” (Latin, mandatum) Jesus gives his disciples to love one another (John 13:34). Unlike John, however, Mark records neither the command nor the footwashing that so powerfully exemplified it. Rather, he focuses on six events: the Last Supper (Mark 14:12-26), Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s denial of him (14:27-31), his Gethsemane prayer (14:32-42), his betrayal and arrest (14:43-52), his Sanhedrin trial (14:53-65), and Peter’s denial (14:66-72). In this post, I would like to focus on Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s denial of him (14:27-31).

 

It is amazing how self-deceived we all can be about the true state of our spiritual vitality. In verse 27, Jesus makes this prediction, backed up by a prophecy from Zechariah 13:7: “You will all fall away, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’” Amazingly, and somewhat arrogantly, Peter replies, “Even if all fall away, I will not” (verse 29).

This is an amazing reply on a number of levels. First, like the crowds that welcomed Jesus at his Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, Peter believed that Jesus was Israel’s long-expected Messiah (Mark 8:29). One is amazed at the easy impudence with which Peter contradicts his king. Second, according to the passage just cited, Peter has already been rebuked by Jesus for contradicting him about his crucifixion. One would think that Peter might have learned to hold his tongue on matters pertaining to Jesus’ future. Amazingly, however he does not.

 

And that brings us to why this is such an arrogant reply. “Even if all fall away,” Peter says, “I will not.” Peter has such a high view of himself that he contradicts Jesus and distances himself from the other disciples at the same time. Given Jesus’ rebuke of him as “Satan” (Mark 8:33), you would think Peter might talk with a bit more humility, but he doesn’t.

 

It’s easy to pick on Peter, all too easy. But if twelve men who had been with Jesus for three years, heard him say what he said, watched him do what he did, and had performed similar actions themselves at his command – if these twelve men couldn’t stick with him through his trials, what makes us think we would have?

 

As I said, our capacity for self-deception about our own spiritual vitality is amazing. What is the remedy? Several things, it seems.

 

First, we must be humble. Why, according to John, did Jesus wash the feet of the disciples (John 13:1-17)? In order to set an example which they should follow (verse 15). After three years, it seems, the disciples still did not understand the intent and motives of their Master. So he had to paint a picture in vivid colors and bold relief of what he wanted them to do.

 

Second, we must be sympathetic. If Peter and the others could not withstand the test of Jesus’ passion, then perhaps we should be sympathetic about their failures and the failures of others. This does not mean that we excuse anyone’s failures, but it does mean that we not stand in judgment against them. We have the same failings as they do, after all.

 

And third, we must be forgiving. Jesus’ was realistic about the low spiritual vitality of his disciples. He knew they would fail. But he also knew they could be restored: “But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee” (Mark 14:28). It was as if he was planting a seed of hope in their minds. After failure, redemption; after Jerusalem, Galilee.

 

This is a promise to us too.

 

There are many kinds of lies. Wikipedia lists eleven: bold-faced lie, lying by omission, lie-to-children, white lie, emergency lie, perjury, bluffing, misleading, dissembling, exaggeration, and jocose lies. These vary in moral blameworthiness. For example, lying to your husband about his upcoming birthday party is surely less blameworthy than perjury in open court!

 

In general, as we saw yesterday, God hates lying. There are occasions when biblical characters lie in order to save lives (e.g., Rahab hiding the Israelites spies in Joshua 2:1-7). But these occasions are few and far between, and the lie, while morally questionable, prevents a greater harm.

 

One kind of lying that God particularly hates is perjury, lying in a court of law. Proverbs 6:19 states: “[God hates] a false witness who pours out lies.” Three proverbs contrast the testimony of a truthful witness with that of a perjurer:

 

A truthful witness gives honest testimony,

but a false witness tells lies (12:17).

 

A truthful witness does not deceive,

but a false witness pours out lies (14:5).

 

A truthful witness saves lives,

but a false witness is deceitful (14:25).

 

Perjury is the intentional representation of false information as true information. It should be distinguished from testimony that the witness mistakenly believes is true but is in fact false.

 

Why would anyone perjure himself? To gain a personal advantage over someone else. This proverb identifies revenge as one possible motive:

 

Do not testify against your neighbor without cause,

or use your lips to deceive.

Do not say, “I’ll do to him as he has done to me;

I’ll pay that man back for what he did” (24:28-29).

 

Another possible motive is hatred:

 

He who conceals his hatred has lying lips,

and whoever spreads slander is a fool (10:18).

 

In this proverb, a man conceals the true reason for what he says about his neighbor. If that motivation were known, it would cast into doubt what he is saying. That’s why his speech is characterized as “lying lips.”

 

There are two possible outcomes to perjured testimony. The first is injustice, in which the falsely accused are wrongly punished.

 

A corrupt witness mocks at justice,

and the mouth of the wicked gulps down evil (19:28).

 

Like a club or a sword or a sharp arrow

is the man who gives false testimony against his neighbor (25:18).

 

The second is exposure (and perhaps judicial punishment) of the perjurer:

 

Do not bring hastily to court,

for what will you do in the end

if your neighbor puts you to shame? (25:8).

 

As we read these proverbs, we should take to heart the lesson to speak truthfully in all situations but especially in open court. If called to jury duty, we should discern – where possible – the credibility of the witnesses. What is their motivation for testifying?

 

But we should also be keenly aware that sometimes, we evaluate testimony on the basis of our own prejudices, which should be ruthlessly eliminated from our heart, less we be party to injustice ourselves. For as this proverb reminds us:

 

A wicked man listens to evil lips;

a liar pays attention to a malicious tongue (17:4).

 

In sum: Don’t lie, and don’t listen to lies!