For us to understand this reading, it seems like it would be important that we know who the “they” and “them” of whom Jesus speaks are. The modified verse 11 does not contain this context, nor does any verse before that in John Chapter 17. Instead, we must look back to Chapter 16 to see that Jesus is apparently talking to his disciples.  He says later, though, that he does not pray “only for them, but also for those who would believe in me through their word.”

One of the first things that struck me in this prayer is Jesus’s apparent references to Satan. I have confessed previously that I am agnostic on the existence of the devil, and his description in the Bible as a whole is sketchy at best. Here, though, Jesus refers to the “son of destruction” and “the evil one.” These could easily have been insertions or distortions of Jesus’s words, but assuming for the moment that the Gospel of John is as reliable as the other three Gospels (and, of course, assuming they are reliable as well), it certainly adds to the case for the existence of the Prince of Darkness. Notice how the use of “the evil one” sounds similar to the Lord’s prayer and how the exeption of the “son of destruction” being lost is referred to as the fulfillment of Scripture and thus of God’s plan.

Jesus also reiterates twice that “they do not belong to the world any more than [he] belong[s] to the world” (John 17:14,16). This is interesting in that, besides re-enforcing the idea that mankind is divine in its truest nature, Jesus seems to be equating himself with his disciples as the rest of humanity. If I were willing to pursue a bolder interpretation, I might use this as evidence that Jesus truly was only a man, and never claimed to be divine. Short of this, I would at least say that it is admirable humility on Jesus’s part. But, truly, it is both exciting and comforting to think of one’s self as a soul created in heaven, and sent to earth merely in a human shell. Not just in God’s image would we be, but in God’s essence.

Finally, I am interested in Jesus’s specific invocations to God:

Holy Father, keep them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one just as we are one. (John 17:11)

I do not ask that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one. (John 17:15)

Consecrate them in the truth. (John 17:17)

What does Jesus want for us? He wants us to remain “in God,” that is, acting according to God’s will, so that we might be united. He does not want us to die, but be protected from the evil that is a natural part of the world. He wants us to know truth. Isn’t this, in some sense, what we all want? Perhaps some people would prefer not to call themselves “in God,” but they certainly would like us to all act together to love one another and be united. Nobody “really” wants to die, and everyone wishes to be protected from evil. And, most universally, we all want to know truth. Jesus’s prayer is an ideal model for our own. Perhaps you could use a modified version of John 17:11-19 as a prayer sometimes.

As you can see, Jesus clearly knows what we want, and wants to give it to us. Sometimes, all it takes is for us to just ask. It helps, tough, for us to know what we want, too.

Peace,

Timothy

Because of all that love, this is one of my favorite passages in the Gospel according to John. At the end of the day, my convictions are firm, Christianity is a religion of love. Or, at the very least, it is supposed to be. There are a lot of  priests and preachers who will go on and on about what God hates or what is sinful in the eyes of God and thus punishable. They are nearly as old as the Church herself. While I of course believe in sin and that crimes can certainly be committed against God, I don’t think that was what Jesus was trying to primarily convey. This entire passage, really, I think is what Jesus is trying to primarily convey. Since I figure it’s so important, I’ll break it down for you into an attractive numbered list:

1. God loved Jesus because he lived by God’s word
2. Jesus loves us, and he expressed that love by laying down his life for us and by revealing God’s word
3. God’s word is this: love each other as Jesus has loved you, and so therefore:
4. God loves us and we show our love to God by loving each other

I’ve “derived” this”formula” before, but I think it’s impossible to overstate its significance. Everything else aside, we must, as Christians, love every one of our fellow human beings, just as Jesus loved every one of us. The rest is just details. I’ll take a moment to muse over these details.

An interesting detail is this: Jesus says “I no longer call you slaves…I have called you friends.” This has always grabbed me when I heard it. What?! I didn’t even know I was supposed to be a slave. Yet, in the Old Testament, Moses, his successor Joshua, and even King David are all called “servants” or “slaves” of Yahweh, depending on the translation (Deuteronomy 34:5, Joshua 24:29, and Psalm 89:21, respectively). It is only the father and ancestor Abraham that was called a “friend” of God (Isaiah 4:18). As insulting as it may sound, it is not so derogatory. If God is truly far greater than man, than we would be far more diminished in his eyes than we are in our own; certainly more than fellow human beings are. Humans were never meant to be slaves of other humans, but if God created us, he likely created us to serve him in some way. The great mystery, of course, is in what way (what is the meaning of life?).

But, perhaps God just wants to love us as we love our own children, as Jesus seems to indicate in this gospel passage. Or, if we take this passage even further, perhaps God simply wants us only to love each other. And truly, what could be more loving than to lay down your one and only life on earth for the sake of someone else? Could you have that love for every human being? Jesus did.

Peace,

Timothy

In this joke, the Christian must be referring to today’s reading, John 15:1-8. Out of the many metaphors that Jesus uses, this is one of my favorites. God is the vine-grower, the creator, and Jesus is the vine. We, in turn, are the branches. That is, we are the extensions of Jesus. It is very similar to another metaphor that Jesus uses, and the disciples in turn use, that we are the “body of Christ,” and are like his appendeges. But this metaphor takes it in a different direction. Some key elements are the same, though: as branches of the vine, we are reminded that we cannot, and do not, survive without God. If we are cut off from Him like branches, then we will wither. Jesus says that if we do not bear fruit, then we will be cut off. But I also believe that we can cut ourselves off, if I may be permitted to strech the metaphor. Of course, nothing we do can actually remove us from our ultimate dependence on God. Like many a science-fiction book have demonstrated, no matter how powerful we become, the universe is more powerful still. But we can certainly cut God out of our personal lives, and wall ourselves off from Him. We can ignore our dependence on Him and never ask for help.

So, let’s explore the metaphor a little bit more. What are the fruits that we are supposed to bear? In my view, they can be any or all of the following: love, kindness, virtue, doing good for others, giving glory to God. That is, apparently, what we are here on Earth to do. But we cannot do any of these things unless we have the spirit of Christ in our hearts. But the metaphor doesn’t stop there; we are ‘pruned’ says Jesus, so that we may bear more fruit. What does Jesus mean by this? He says to his disciples, “You are already pruned because of the word that I spoke to you” (John 15:3). What does this mean? Is he speaking only to his disciples or to anyone who hears the Word of God?

Honestly, I don’t know. Perhaps ‘pruning’ does mean to hear the Word of God. If so, then it would seem that one could ‘bear fruit’ without necessarily hearing the Word of God, and therefore without necessarily being Christian or even religious. If we are allowed to take it that way, Jesus’ metaphor takes on an entirely new dimension. But perhaps it has an additional (or completely different) meaning. ‘Pruning’ seems to me to be an inherently painful act for a vine, even if it is good for it in the end. According to the ever-resourceful Wikipedia,  pruning a vine entails removing parts that are “diseased, non-productive, ortherwise unwanted portions from a plant.” The idea is that the removal of these “excess” parts allows the plant to devote more of its resources into producing fruits. To me, “pruning” a human might involve making painful “cuts” in their lives; perhaps a death, or a traumatic event. The idea is that, because of these things, a noble virture may sprout in a person’s soul. Note that this general idea is known as a “theodicy,” or defense of God when confronted with the “Problem of Evil:” there is evil is misfortune in the world because it promotes good. I do not find it a wholly satisfying answer myself, but it can still fit within the context of the metaphor. ‘Pruning’ may mean a world of different things to God.

There is another thing to note. Jesus says, of the withered branches that have been ‘cut’ from the vine:

People will gather them and throw them into a fire, and they will be burned. (John 15:6)

This is more evidence for the common image of Hell as a burning pit of fire that cannot be quenched. I have my doubts that Hell is actually like this (or that it exists at all), since Jesus clearly cannot be taken to speak literally most of the time. After all, we are not actually plants!

One last interesting tidbit about this metaphor: it’s also about Israel (that is, the ancient kingdom of the Jews, not necessarily the present-day country). Many, many times in the Bible, Israel is referred to as a vinyard in Isaiah 5:1-7 and Matthew 21:33-46, and as a vine in Psalm 80:9-17 and Ezekiel 15:2, among many others. Wisdom describes herself as a vine in Sirach 24:17 and Psalm 80:16 may be interpreted as saying the Son of Man is a vine. Clearly, Jesus knows his scripture.

Peace,

-Timothy

Jesus begins very distinctly:

I am the good shepherd.

I like this quote because it’s crisp and clear. As I often mention, Jesus speaks in parable, allegory, similie, and metaphor. Here, he’s using the bold metaphor. He is not like a good shepherd, he is the good shepherd. So, what makes a good shepherd? Jesus gives us that, as well:

A good shepherd lays his life down for the sheep.

This is actually quite startling. Did shepherds back in those days really die to protect their sheep? I don’t know, but the idea is still powerful. I love animals and I love sheep; I can imagine I’d love my own flock of sheep very much if I had to take care of one. But would I die for sheep? Probably not. But Jesus was in an analogous situation. For someone who is an aspect of God, humans to him must be like animals to us. And yet, he still died for them. He died for us.

We’re more like sheep in more ways than just our lowliness in comparison to God. Sheep are peculiar creatures. They are possessed by an overwhelming urge, coded right into their DNA and written inextricably in their psyche, to herd, follow. It doesn’t matter what; dogs, humans, even Jeeps. It is in their nature to gather and follow. I have heard that sheep, when left alone, do very stupid things. If there is no fence guarding the edge of a cliff, a sheep may hurl itself off the edge and die instantly. But, they will try to jump over fences, too, even if they’re made of barbed wire. Many sheep badly injure themselves in such a way. If they find a bountiful patch of grass, they will continue to gorge themselves well beyond their need, until they get sick.

Religious people are sometimes derisively called “sheeple” because of the ease with which we may sometimes be misled by a charismatic leader or flawed ideology. But that tendency is not unique to us in the least bit. Rather, it is because we are human that we seek to be led, not because we are religious. Indeed, it is for that reason that we are religious in the first place. Those that do not believe in organized religion may find them strong devotees of new-age spiritualism, or of astrology, of philosophers and philosophies, or even of a cult. The belief in the absence of a God may also be, in its own way, a guiding belief and principle. Like organized religion, any of these other paths can lead one astray, and sometimes into peril. The important thing is that we follow only who is worthy leading us. For me and other Christians, that person is Jesus. Mortal humans are the bad shepherds that Jesus mentions, who are ‘hired’ and do not own the sheep. Humans do not own each other; we have only what God has given us. We all have our own motivation, our own “wages” for doing whatever it is we do, even if it is a good deed. Only God can selflessly lead us with our best interests at heart.

Why do we have this burning desire to follow? I believe that it was worked into our minds by God himself, so that we may seek him. We seek truth, every one of us, regardless of what we believe. We look for meaning. It may or may not be out there; I believe it is. And, let’s face it: we can’t really run our own lives. Humans as a species, when left to themselves, are like sheep in that they gorge on excess, become self-destructive, and seek to tread where we do not belong. Perhaps sheep realize this and that is why they follow a shepherd. Perhaps deep down, we realize it too.

There is one last thing in this reading that I’d like to examine: the final verses, John 10:17-18.

This is why the Father loves me,
because I lay down my life in order to take it up again.
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own.
I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again.

There. Did you catch that? Read it again. Jesus is telling us the key to being faithful followers, to guaranteeing ourselves a place in heaven. For all our similarities to our woolly friends, this is the difference between us and sheep: we have the choice to follow Jesus. We have the power not just to live our own lives, our way, but the power to give it all up. And THAT is how you impress God.

Peace.

-Timothy

In part one, I discussed the separation of church & state in America. I maintained that America’s government was meant to be areligious. But what if it wasn’t?

Christianity didn’t become a major world religion until it was officially declared the state religion of Rome by emperor Theodosius I (hence the name Roman Catholic Church; this name, however, was not given to the church by itself). While Rome was still a major empire, Christianity went from being punishable by death to well on its way to a worldwide faith with over 1.5 billion followers. Clearly, Rome’s adoption of Christianity was very, very good for the faith. However, the Roman empire eventually crumbed, and Christians were further scattered throughout the world. Christianity, in some form or another, has been the state religion of many countries throughout history, most notably Spain and England. However, relatively few countries today have Christianity as their state religion; among them are Georgia, Argentina, and Monaco.

There’s a reason why there aren’t many countries that have Christianity as their state religion. In general, countries in the past who have-or have tried to-mesh the church with the government have had it end disastrously…for both parties. Consider England, who famously rebelled from the Catholic Church because the king wanted a divorce. Or consider Spain, who used its Church-Government power to torture and murder thousands upon thousands of non-Catholics. Kings in the days of old claimed they were chosen by God and used their limitless power to oppress their citizens.

But it isn’t just Christianity that has a bad track record with “God-backed” government. The Roman Empire, before its “Christianization”, held that the emperor was actually a god. Before even Rome, ancient Egypt was the same way. As Emperor Nero can attest, they certainly didn’t always do a bang-up job. The Japanese Emperor used to be considered divine. So did the Chinese Emperor.  As long as there have been governments, there have been rulers who called themselves divine. What we recognize today is that none of them really were. That is why so many of these countries no longer have religion-backed government.

Non-Christian religious governments also exist today. Many middle-eastern countries, such as Iran, are basically ruled by the Islamic (sort of) equivalent of high priests, Ayatollahs. While these Ayatollas do not consider themselves divine, their power is nonetheless vast.

The reason why religion is so often tied to politics is because it makes it much easier to get your citizens to do what you want. If some guy off the street told you to build him a pyramid, you probably wouldn’t do it. But if he said he was actually God…well, who are you to disagree? If God tells you to build a pyramid, you’d better build a pyramid. This is, of course, a silly example, but hopefully you get the idea. Religion can keep citizens in place better than even the greatest armies. Then there are rulers who actually do believe they’re divine, because they’re so obsessed with their power. Today this is recognized as megalomania, rather than divinity. Religious rulers who do not claim to be divine still claim their commands are straight from God. Of course, many people claim to act in the name of God. It’s hard to imagine, though, that a suicide bomber is actually carrying out God’s will.

And therein lies one of the major problems with wedding the church and the state: it means, inescapably, handing some degree of religious authority to a leader or ruler. And once that leader has such authority, the temptation to abuse it is far too great. Our leaders, after all, are human, and not divine. They will inevitably “mess up.” And when they do abuse their power, we get such horrible things as suicide bombers. And if you even start thinking that Christians are different, I have all of anno Domini to back me up.

Always, always, always be careful when putting the power of God into the hands of man.

-Timothy

If you’re like me, you shudder when you see those words put together like that. I’ll go ahead and tell you right off of the bat that I don’t approve of mixing them. You may disagree. Hopefully, if that’s the case, I can persuade you (whatever your political beliefs) to agree with me that they should be kept as far apart as possible. Now, this letter will focus mainly on American politics because I’m not familiar enough with any others to really have anything to say about them (other than that it’s a safe bet that God shouldn’t be in them). Also, it has been my observation that of all industrialized so-called “Western” countries, religion plays the biggest role in American politics. If you’re reading this in another country, I encourage you to continue anyways, as I believe that what I have to say is very general. There is a lot to be said, so this will be yet another multi-letter series.

Let’s start by clearing up a few myths about religion American politics. First, is America really a “Christian Nation” as is so often claimed? Well, that depends on what you mean by a “Christian Nation.” If you mean a country were the large majority of the religious population identifies itself as Christian then, yes, America is a “Christian nation.” However, if you mean a country built on Christian ideals by Christian men, then America is emphatically not a “Christian Nation.” Most of America’s most famous “Founding Fathers” were, in fact, deists. A “deist” is someone who believes that God created the universe, but that He is for the most part unconcerned with its actual day-to-day affairs. Deists in general do not believe in miracles or, in most cases, the divinity of Jesus. While deism is not so popular now, in the time when the Declaration of Independence (and later the Constitution) was drafted, it was very popular in the intellectual circles that America’s Founding Fathers were part of.

As for the United States Constitution, it was based less on Biblical law and Ten Commandments (as is sometimes claimed) than the writings of influential philosophers of the time, such as John Locke (as it happens, John Locke was actually not a deist). Certainly, though, the Founding Fathers were influenced by Christian ideas; Thomas Jefferson actually wrote his own version of the Gospels, though it portrayed Jesus as completely human and removed references to supernatural miracles.

There are also a lot of myths regarding the “Separation of Church and State” in America. The phrase actually does not appear in any of the official founding documents of the United States, including the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. It does, however, appear in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, a Founding Father and the principle author of the Declaration of Independence. Interestingly, he was writing not to government officials encouraging them not to worry about religious interference, but instead to a minority Christian group assuring them that the government would not interfere with their faith. The justification for the principle in general comes not from Jefferson’s letter, but from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which he was writing about. The First Amendment forbids the US government from establishing a State religion, effectively guaranteeing the freedom to practice any religion (or no religion) in America. Additionally, Article 6 in the Constitution forbids any religious “tests” for those who wish to hold public office. Both of these rules, combined with a Founding Father’s interpretation for them, make an overwhelming case that the American government was intended to be secular and not Christian. Certainly, the words “Christian,” “Christianity,” “Christ,” or “Jesus.” do not appear anywhere in the Constitution.

Finally, there is a persistent myth that the Republican Party in America is the party of Christianity. While it is true that Christians, especially Evangelicals, make up a sizable and very influential portion of the party (the so-called “Religious Right”), it is a mistake to assume that all “real” American Christians are Republicans, or that all Republicans are Christian. In fact, religious identity cuts both ways. While it is true that Democrats (or, rather, liberals) are less likely to identify themselves as Christian or religious in general, most Democrats and self-identified liberals are Christian. After all, like I said earlier, Americans are mostly Christian. I know many Democrats who go to church every week and are very religious, but feel like Christianity calls them to the other side of the political spectrum.

And so, here, I’ve already touched on a number of issues with religion in American politics. Firstly, Americans feel inclined to pick one political party over another due to their religious teachings. A Republican, for example, may read, say Leviticus 20:13 and interpret it such that God forbids gay marriage, and it should thus be illegal. Since the Republican party often supports such initiatives, the Republican believes God commands him to be Republican. However, a Democrat may read Psalm 82:3-4 and interpret it such that the poor should be given welfare to improve their lives. Since the Democratic party often supports such initiatives, the Democrat believes God commands him to be Democratic.

One of the issues is that, as anyone who’s sat in a pew at church has noticed, the Bible seems to feature two Gods: the God of the Old Testament who is strict and vengeful, and the God of the New Testament, who is loving and merciful. While there are a variety of explanations for this, the point is that it is obviously possible for Christians to disagree about what God wants. In fact, recent research has shown that what “kind” of God you believe in makes you more likely to have certain political beliefs or values.

Another problem with picking political affiliation based on faith is that political parties are the work of men. Therefore, they cannot be Godly, as they are limited in every way by the flaws of man. Scandal after scandal has rocked both sides of the isle in the US Congress, and it is often the most devout-appearing politicians that fall the hardest on their face. While I don’t necessarily believe that there is anything wrong with picking a political philosophy, such as liberal or conservative, based on your faith is a bad thing to do, your loyalty should be to God and not a political party, no matter how much they claim to represent Him.

Remember, God is God of all people, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, American or any other person in the world.

-Timothy

I hope you had a wonderful Easter! It’s been a long journey, but hopefully there were Peeps at the end. More importantly, Jesus has risen!

The Catholic church, which I base my homily schedule on, has three different readings for this day (John 20:1-9, Mark 16:1-7, or Luke 24:13-35). This year, I’ll focus on the one that I heard last night during the Easter Vigil at my church, from the Gospel according to Mark.

I like this reading for several reasons, which I’ll get to in a moment. First, a quick synopsis of what happened, since this part of scripture can be a bit confusing: Mary Magdalene, Jesus’ mother Mary, and a disciple named Salome come to Jesus’ tomb to perform a customary anointing for his body. It was early in the morning on the first day of the week (Sunday, according to the Church), and they were worried about how they were going to move the enormous boulder that was in front of his tomb. This is important, because the boulder was apparently heavy enough that one or even a handful of people would not be able to move it (note the inclusion of the blunt ‘it was very large.’ This is why the women are astonished when they find it has already been moved aside. Fearing that Jesus’ body has been stolen, they enter the tomb to find a teenager sitting inside of it clothed in a white robe. Instantly understanding who they were looking for, he tells them in no uncertain terms that Jesus has been raised from the dead, and instructs them to tell Peter and the other disciples that Jesus will meet them in Galilee, just as he said he would in Mark 14:28.

I like this story because it involves the direct participation of the women, which the Luke reading does not, and it features a mysterious “young man,” which the reading from John does not. Who is the mysterious “young man?” Accounts from various Gospels differ. In Luke 24:4, it is instead two men who appear (also, the woman Joanna, instead of Salome, is identified as with the two Marys). The reading from John says the women had a “vision of angels,” so we may assume that this young man is an angel.

The differences between the versions (and there are, of course, several more) is one reason to keep in mind that even the Gospels are the work of man, though they are divinely inspired. The accounts in the Gospels, like the rest of the Bible, were spread orally countless times before being committed to writing.

Of course, none of that is as important as the simple fact that Jesus Rose from the Dead. Many Christian and Scriptural scholars have tried to make the case that the idea of a man rising from the dead was inconceivable at the time that it would have occurred, and that thus the story is unlike to have been fabricated. Of course, others contend that it was, in fact, fabricated, and have even identified potential burial sites for Jesus’ remains. This makes the resurrection, like most other things in Christianity, a matter of faith. But unlike any other thing in Christianity, this belief is central to Christianity, and is the foundation for all other faith. To not accept that Jesus was raised from the dead is to not only surrender that he was not divine, but to surrender that he had any divine purpose whatsoever. Indeed, some contend that Jesus was just a man, but that his mission was designated by God.

Regardless, Jesus’s conquering of death is essential to the entire concept of Christianity, which contends that his victory means that we, too, may conquer death and live forever because of his work.  Think about that. Everything Christians believe…the redemption of salvation of mankind, the fulfillment of God’s covenant, the promise of a new Heaven and Earth, the possibility of eternal life…all because Jesus died, and then did what no one else had done, and has done since: didn’t stay dead.

That’s amazing. Be sure to pay him your gratitude, and have a wonderful Easter.

-Timothy

Holy Thursday

Holy Thursday marks the night before Christ died, when he shared the Last Supper. As it will be this year, “Holy Thursday” for Jesus was the beginning of the Jewish celebration of passover. I personally cannot think of a more Biblically significant time for Jesus to die. Passover commemorates the freeing of the Jews from slavery in ancient Egypt. As the familiar story goes, Moses sent 10 plagues over Egypt, the last one being the death of each first-born son. The Jews were told to put a mark on their door to prevent the angel of death from claiming their own first-born children. Of course, while Jesus probably observed all the formalities of passover, as God’s own first-born son, he, too will die.

Since Holy Thursday marks the Last Supper, it also marks the beginning of the Eucharistic tradition. Jesus told his disciples to that the bread they ate was his body, and their wine, his blood (of course, I’ve offered my interpretation of Jesus’ words). This is also the night where several churches re-enact Jesus washing the feet of his disciples.

Good Friday

The perhaps ironically-named Good Friday marks the occasion of Christ’s death, also known as the Passion. In the Catholic Church, though worshipers attend church, the occasion is not a formal “Mass” as the blessing of the Eucharist does not take place. Instead, Eucharist blessed on Holy Thursday is used. The Catholic church also counter-intuitively hides or veils all crucifixes, as well as images of Saints. The narrative of Christ’s Passion, from his betrayal, to his trial before Pilate, to his eventual crucifixion, is sometimes acted out by churchgoers.

Holy Saturday

Holy Saturday commemorates the day that Christ spent in his tomb. Or, perhaps it is more correct to say, his body in the tomb. Now, if you’re like me, you’re confused by the notion that Jesus was dead for three “days,” when, from the Triduum, it appears that he was dead for only two. This confusion arises from the fact that the concept of a “day” in the Triduum is that of the traditional Jewish concept of a “day,” which lasts from sunset to sunset. Taking this into account, Jesus was technically dead for three “days” before he was resurrected.

Technically, church services are not held on Holy Saturday. However, the end of Holy Saturday becomes the Easter Vigil, an anticipation of Christ’s resurrection and essentially a late-night celebration of Easter.

I wish the best of luck to you on your spiritual journey in the next three days. I’ll see you on Sunday.

-Timothy

Though the Book of Revelations clearly predictsa Jesus victory, questions of bias call the prophesy into question. John, whoever he was, was obviously a devout believer in-and a huge fan of-Jesus Christ of Nazareth. In his own words:

Jesus is EXTREME to the MAX!!! Ain’t NOBODY gonna mess him up, not now, and not in the future when some 7-headed son-of-a-gun is all up in his FACE. (Revelations 12:3)

Now, we can probably assume that the ’7-headed son-of-a-gun’ that John refers to is probably not an actual offspring of a pistol with seven heads. Rather, it is likely a symbolism for the forces of evil; namely, Satan.

Satan, of course, gets a pretty bad rap in the Bible, and with good reason. He is often credited with the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden and every work of evil committed on Earth. But it is perhaps naive to assume that because of this, he is incapable of taking on Jesus in a hand-to-hand combat event of epic proportions. Satan clearly has natural weapons at his disposal that Jesus lacks: horns, hooves, and a pointy tail, for starters. But Satan is also very crafty. Remember, he planted the dinosaur bones that have tricked our finest archaeologists into believing that the Earth is older than 6000 years. Satan’s wiles combined with his physical advantages make him more than a formidable opponent for Jesus at the end of time.

Of course, it is questionable to even assume that Satan will be the one Jesus squares off against. The Book of Revelations prophesizes that the dead will rise on Judgement Day. Therefore, it may very well be that Jesus will not have to face Satan or the Antichrist at all, but rather an army of the undead. Jesus against the zombies of every human that’s ever died? I wouldn’t want to be the Christ in that situation.

But, regardless of how many lurching, brain-hungry undead Jesus can actually take, we may still ask him for strength to challenge the zombie challenges that we face in our own lives, that seem to continue popping up even after we thought we handled them before. Remember that with a little faith, and a shotgun, anything is possible.

-Timothy

P.S. Have a happy April 1st!

The passage begins with some Greeks asking Jesus’ disciples if they can wrangle him up, and they do. This is where the straightforward reading of the Gospel breaks down, and the second-handedness of the account begins to show. It is unclear if Jesus comes and starts preaching to the Greeks, or if he starts preaching to his disciples without answering their question (“Can you go see these guys?”). Neither one makes a whole lot of sense, but fortunately, what really happens is not important. What’s important is what Jesus says.

One of the most important lines that Jesus says (if not the most),  is this:

Amen, amen, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains just a grain of wheat; but if it dies, it produces much fruit. (John 12:24).

Ignoring the biological question of whether a grain of wheat actually “dies” when it falls to the ground, this little passage has more than a “grain” of profundity. In fact, if we interpret it a certain way, it may be a clue towards the solution of the so-called “Problem of Evil.” The analogy may, in fact, be only about Jesus: how only through his death can he bring salvation. However, we may also interpret it as pertaining to all humans. If so, then it would seem to imply that only death can make a person’s life truly meaningful. If this doesn’t make sense, consider this: many great artists are never appreciated in their lifetimes. Of course, many are appreciated in their lifetimes, but after their deaths they either fade into obscurity or are glorified even more. Perhaps, out of death’s many transformations, the most powerful is its ability to transform a person into a legend. Certainly Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King, Jr, and Abraham Lincoln were all famous and highly-regarded in their lifetimes. It was only after their deaths, though (and in two cases, partially because of their manner of death) that they became the omnipresent icons that they are today. The best example, of course, would be Jesus, but it could be further argued (in a manner of faith) that his return from the dead was more important to his success. Perhaps people die because of what their deaths do for the world. In the case of a deceased person’s family members and loved ones, the death poses a tragic challenge that they must overcome, and in the process, presumably build vital character.  A dead loved one may serve as an inspiration for the living.

Of course, the passage may also be interpreted as speaking of the reward that awaits one after death. This context makes the most sense in light of the next verse, in which Jesus warns people to not love their life too much. What? We’re not even allowed to enjoy life? Why even be alive? I don’t think Jesus is actually saying that life is not meant to be enjoyed. Rather, he is cautioning against putting too much importance on worldly things (See Matthew 6:19-21). For example, some people may have tons of money in this life, and love their life for it. However, if they love their money more than they love God, they stand to lose everything, so to speak. Certainly this is true even outside of a religious context. Like they say, you can’t take it with you. What’s the point of amassing a giant amount of wealth without making the world a better place if you’re going to die anyways? No one will remember you, at least not in the way that truly great people are remembered. I’m sure there were many, many rich people in ancient Greece, but we don’t remember the name of any of them. We remember the leaders all right, but we also remember how well they led; the worst are immortalized in shame for all of history.

In this passage, Jesus also says something very odd: “I am troubled now.” Some interpret this as Jesus referring to his future suffering in Gethsemane or on the cross, and this may be true, but Jesus does not say “I will be troubled.” I believe Jesus is sharing his human side, and showing the disciples or the Greeks (or both) that he suffers in this world was well. But then, he sets an example and says, “Yet what should I say? ‘Father save me from this hour’? But it was for this purpose that I came to this hour.” (John 12:27). Of course, Jesus is talking about his need to die on the cross. But, he may also be saying, by my interpretation of the previous verses, that we are all here, in our own hour, for a purpose. Certainly Jesus had to suffer for his purpose, but it could not have happened any other way. And no one else could see it at the time, nobody but the Father.

Finally, Jesus calls on God to glorify His name, which he does, to everyone’s amazement. Some wrote it off as thunder, which it well could have been, since it came from a cloud. But others heard the voice of God in the noise, and were awed. Jesus basically tells them that the cloud had come as a sign, so that they might believe. Jesus clearly did not need God to speak to him directly to know that He was there. Jesus then says that Judgement is fast approaching, and that the ruler of the world would soon be driven out. This is usually interpreted as Satan, but to the Greeks, it probably meant Caesar. If the end happened today, we would certainly see a vast number of rulers (for there are many) driven out. Jesus ends by saying that when he is “lifted up from the earth,” he’s taking all of us with him. Rather than having us beamed up like in a flying saucer, Jesus probably was indicating that we will one day become one with him and with God.

But, until that day, we are left like grains of wheat on a stalk, thirsty for rain.

-Timothy