Joy – This is behavior directed by delayed gratification.  Oh, how difficult this is!  Especially when the task necessary to reach that delayed joy is excruciating, exhausting and exclusively yours.  Alone, you plod forward, buffeted by ridicule, rejection and abuse.  But the joy set before you keeps you going.  No one understands the purpose of your quest at this moment.  Perhaps you even doubt the outcome.  But you trust the One who asks for perseverance.  Joy comes in the morning, but the night is dark and deep.

The author of Hebrews encourages us to fix our eyes on Yeshua.  Why?  Because His perseverance is our hope.  We are called to follow Him.  That means we must see the joy over the horizon and take another step in the dark.  We have His promise, guaranteed by His action, that there is joy unspeakable waiting, waiting, waiting – and we will soon step into the light.

It is significant that Yeshua did not greet the women who came to the tomb on that morning after the long, dark night with the usual “Shalom.”  Matthew says that he stopped them the word “Chairete”,  Rejoice!  (although you will have a hard time seeing this in some English translations since they skip the Greek word).  Joy to you!  Immediately something has changed.  This is not what we expect.  It is never found in the Old Testament as a greeting.  The common Hebrew greeting should have been shalom – peace!  Shalom in its true context means completeness, wholeness, harmony or fulfillment in both our undertakings and our relationships.  This kind of peace is the result of God’s promise.  This was the common greeting of every Jew – a wish of God’s well being for another.  But shalom no longer fits reality.

Most of our English Bibles do not translate the actual Greek word.  They treat His greeting as an idiom, offering us something like “Hail!” or “Hello.”  But the word is chairete – “Rejoice!” – from the same root word as joy (charis).  Yeshua didn’t speak a causal hello.  He altered forever the perspective we have about this world.  Before the resurrection, we wished well-being for each other (Shalom), but after the resurrection, there is no need to wish for well-being.  It has arrived.  It is guaranteed.  Now we can say, “Rejoice!”  The dark night is over.  The dawn has come.  And soon the day will follow.

The author of Hebrews knows that if we are distracted by the present shadows sticking to our travel toward the light, we will divert our eyes from the Finisher of our faith.  We will see the edge of darkness and not realize the world has changed.  We will grope our way through the night, not realizing that the door to the tomb is open.  Wishing for shalom, we will miss the greeting in the garden and overlook the guarantee.  So we must fix our eyes on Him.  He is the only one who has gone ahead, who knows the path, who sees the end from the middle.  No other offers joy.

How easily the dark fingers of despair turn our eyes aside.  How quickly we forget that stone rolled out of the way.  As soon as we direct our gaze away from Him, we can’t see where we’re going.  In those panic-stricken moments, we grasp whatever gratifies, losing the joy of the morning.   Blink.  Adjust your vision.  And follow Him.

Topical Index:  joy, charis, rejoice, Hebrews 12:2

The grace of our Lord Yeshua HaMashiach with all of you. Amen. Philippians 4:23

Grace – Charis is one of the most important words in the Ketuvim Netzarim (New Testament). It is by grace (charis) alone that we are saved. God’s charis is our strength and shield as we await the return of His Son. We are known to each other by the charis we share with each other. The word is found in the symbolic meal (eucharist), in our greeting (“Rejoice!”) and in the character of our community. We know this word. Or do we?

If we recognize that Hebrew is a dynamic language, built around the flow of actions rather than the accumulation of things, perhaps we need to give more consideration to “grace” as event-language rather than spiritual coinage. Perhaps our experience of God’s grace is much more akin to swimming in the flow than it is to being awarded a trophy. Maybe it’s the journey, not the destination, that really matters.

We have a verb “to grace.” It’s not very common, but we do know how to use it. “Would you grace my presence with your company?” This is grace as action. What does it mean? It means to do honor or provide credit to someone by the way that we behave. This verb is entirely relational. It can’t function at all without at least two “players” in the mix. The action of “gracing” occurs only in the event of the relationship. As soon as the relationship is removed, the word no longer has meaning. I can’t grace. I can only grace someone or something.

What if God’s grace is a verb? What if God is gracing us with His presence and in that relationship we find rescue, deliverance and salvation? It has nothing to do with us, of course. God is the one who does the gracing. He shows up and we are graced by Him. But if we don’t show up, all God’s gracing won’t benefit us one bit. If we want to experience God’s gracing event, we must get into the flow of the relationship with Him. If love is a verb (and it is), aren’t faith and grace and joy also verbs? None of these are “things” I can add to my spiritual treasure chest for use at a later time. They exist only as I experience them in action, right now. While the grammar is horrific, perhaps we should be speaking of “faithing” and “joying” and “gracing” along with loving. Maybe we need to see our spiritual condition in terms of the journey of experiences in the household of God rather than a collection of mementos from past travels. Do you think the Bible is a picture album or a narrative story? When you read it, are you immersed in the flow of God among men or are you merely a critical historian observing what others wrote?

Imagine what it would be like to walk the event horizon of the intersection of God and His creation every moment of the day. Imagine the wonder, the surprise, the awe you could experience as each new verb came into play along your journey. Imagine what it would be like to swim, not with the Spirit, but in the Spirit. Just imagine.

Topical Index: event horizon, verb, grace, charis, Philippians 4:23, journey

You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace.  Galatians 5:4

Fallen From Grace – What does “fall from grace” mean?  Do you think it’s about denying the Lord?  Or about some hideous sin?  Not according to Paul’s comments to the Galatians.  Falling from grace is the subtle shift from “gift” to “gain.”  God’s grace is a gift, but often we try to gain what can only be given. 

Now, you will say to yourself, “Hey, I don’t do that!  I know that salvation is a gift.  I know I can’t earn it.”  Yes, you’re right.  You accepted God’s gift without meriting it.  But what about the other side of the coin?  What happens when you fall down, when you sin and feel unworthy once again?  You might accept God’s gift of renewed relationship when you are doing well, but what happens when you collapse?  Do you start thinking that your failure has now ruined your relationship with the Lord and it’s up to you to get it back?  Isn’t that exactly the same process that a legalist would use to try to earn salvation in the first place?  Do you think that your sins after accepting God’s grace are somehow handled differently than the sins that you accumulated before you accepted His offer?

It seems to me that a great number of followers entertain theological dualism when it comes to forgiveness.  They don’t mean to do this, but they fall prey to their emotions and lose the perspective of Scripture.  They are thrilled that God rescues them from lives of tragic disobedience.  Then they sin again.  Perhaps they go through a period of real struggle with old habits.  They feel like failures.  After all, they are trying to walk in the Spirit but it just doesn’t seem to be working.  Suddenly they start thinking that the relationship they so desire with the Lord is really about their obedience.  And since they have not been obedient, they conclude that they don’t deserve this relationship.  They set off on the path of strict obedience in hopes that they will once again recover God’s grace.  This, of course, is simply legalism in disguise.  If God doesn’t demand your unfailing obedience in order to rescue you in the first place, why do you think He demands your unfailing obedience in order to maintain your relationship with Him?  Shock of all shocks!  He does not!

But wait!  Does that mean God doesn’t care if I sin?  Of course not.  Sin breaks the relationship.  But it doesn’t break the relationship from God’s point of view.  He is still there, doing all He can to keep you in fellowship with Him.  His door is never closed.  He has not left the building.  You are the one who walked out.  And all that is required for the relationship to be renewed is for you to “do what is right.”  Does that sound familiar?  It should.  Back to Genesis, chapter 4.  This persistent theological dualism is tied to our emotional confusion, not to God’s unwavering reliability.  “If you do what is right, will not your face be lifted up?” 

You fell from grace (tes charitos exepesate) says Paul when you took upon yourselves the burden of proving your worth to God.  Whether that occurs before or after accepting His gift doesn’t change the approach.  When God redeemed you, He settled the matter.  Take His point of view on this.  He will not walk away as long as you decide to stay.  It doesn’t matter how you feel about it.  It only matters what He says about it.  You don’t earn His fellowship before or after He grants you the gift.  You can disrupt it, but you can’t annul it.

Topical Index:  fell from grace, charis, ekpipto, exepesate, sin, dualism, gift, Galatians 5:4

“Likewise, you husbands, dwelling together with your wives according to knowledge, .”   1 Peter 3:7

It is unfortunate that Christianity has been slandered with the idea that wives are the submissive slaves of their husbands. Only sloppy exegesis could have distorted the concept of submission in this way. Any careful scholarly treatment of the usual texts will show that the submission (hupotasso in Greek) is a concept central to every Christian’s life because it was central to the life of Christ Himself. Submission is not gender sensitive nor is it restricted to marital status. It is the mark, indeed the obligation, of every believer. Without it, Christian living is a farce.

It is not my intention to focus on the inflammatory invectives of the current politics aimed at dislodging this central theme from the lives of Christians, whether they are wives or husbands. Instead, I want to show that the statements in Peter’s first letter contain potent strategies designed to assist both husbands and wives in the only goal of marriage that matters – becoming one.

In order to accomplish this task, I believe that we must carefully regard the obligations placed on husbands before we attempt to understand the strategy offered to wives. Peter establishes those obligations in one short verse. But the implications are deep and demanding.

Peter begins his exhortation to husbands with an important but often overlooked conjunctive. Likewise is the Greek word homoios. Notice that this same word is used to introduce the discussion on the behavior of wives, a discussion that clearly involves the concept of submission (hupotasso). In that previous discussion, the word homoios connects us to the thoughts of Chapter 2. Homoios acts as a relational bridge. It literally says “in the same way”. In what same way? To answer this question, we must look back at the material in Chapter 2. We discover that Chapter 2 is concerned with the purpose of suffering as participation in the same pattern demonstrated by our Lord. In other words, Peter is echoing Jesus’ very words, “If they persecuted the Master, will they not also persecute the followers?” Peter is telling all Christians that fellowship with Jesus is a fellowship of suffering and that we are to engage in this suffering in the same way that Jesus did. We are to submit our lives into the hands of the Father, just as Jesus did, without reprisals, without threats and without complaint because there is a purpose here. For Christ, that purpose was the redemption of men who were enemies of God. It is exactly the same for us. The purpose of submission for Christian wives is the redemption of their disobedient husbands.

Now Peter draws on this context again. He introduces the topic of the obligation, purpose and goal of being a husband with a word that refers the reader back to the discussion in Chapter 2. “Likewise”, he says to husbands. In just the same way, and for the same reasons, husbands are called to submission. It is the voluntary act of putting themselves under authority for a purpose. This submission has the same theological base as the submission of wives – God is in charge. God’s sovereignty is the final authority in the universe. Jesus demonstrated the proper attitude of submission under the Father and we are called to follow His example.

dwelling together according to knowledge

“Likewise” establishes the purpose. “Dwelling together” establishes the goal. The verb “dwelling together” is sunoikein. The LXX translated the Hebrew yada with this verb in reference to sexual intercourse within marriage. This is a fully active marriage relationship. There is no doubt we are within the context of “one flesh”. In this context, certain requirements are placed on the husband. Notice that there is no mention of the wife being a believer. Where the previous discussion targets wives with unbelieving husbands, this verse does not discriminate. A Christian husband is to act this way regardless of his wife’s spiritual condition.

But Peter adds something of incredible value to this exhortation to husbands. He says “according to knowledge”. There are several words for knowledge in Greek. Understanding the differences between them is critical. One is ginosko. It is a word that means knowledge that comes from experience. This is knowledge that we gather from living, observing and testing. This knowledge comes through the process of education. By contrast, the Greek word oida has a different implication about knowing. This is knowledge that comes intuitively. It is not pieced together slowly by gathering information. It comes complete. It is a fully formed insight, a personal revelation.

Here Peter uses a form of ginosko. This word means, “present but fragmentary knowledge gathered from experience” in contrast with “clear and exact knowledge”. Peter connects the idea of “dwelling together” and “knowledge” with the Greek word kata. This word tells us that there is a relationship between the two thoughts. Our dwelling together must be regulated by a certain kind of knowledge. So, the sense of this phrase is “living together in marital harmony according to the best understanding you have at the present”. Notice that it is the obligation of the husband to be as informed as possible – to have as much of this kind of knowledge as he can about things that matter in marital co-habitation. And Peter has hidden some treasure here.

Peter is a Hebrew writing in Greek. In order to understand his thoughts, we need to look at the Old Testament, not the Greek culture. It is clear that this letter was written to Messianic believers. They were also thinking in Hebrew thought forms. When Peter tells the husbands reading his letter that they must “dwell” (Hebrew: yada), every Jewish man knew exactly what he was saying. This is about contentment and peace in the marriage bed. Now Peter says, “kata gnosin”. The same root word that would have been translated with the Hebrew yada is present here. Peter is literally saying “yada according to yada”.

How would a Hebrew husband hear this phrase? The key is in the multifaceted word yada.

Yada is used 944 times in the Old Testament. It is used for God’s knowledge of Man, for Man’s knowledge of and for animals, for distinguishing good and evil, for knowing a person either as an acquaintance or with deep intimacy, for sexual intercourse, for personal relationship with the divine and for prophetic understanding of God’s character. The critical context in Peter’s reference is knowledge of God’s intentions and purpose.

Yada places Peter’s exhortation within the context of the Hebrew understanding of marriage. That context is permeated with the symbols of the covenant relationship. If yada drives us back to the first couple, it also drives us back to the first marriage – a de facto marriage instituted by God.

The essence of that marriage is found in Genesis 2:24. Marriage is a two-fold movement – away from parents and toward the beloved. Notice the curiosity of this announcement of the relational movement in marriage. The Hebrew culture was patriarchal in every way. With few but notable exceptions, its history is the history of males. But here the verse instituting marriage clearly defines the movement of a man leaving his parents and joining a woman. We would have expected just the opposite. In fact, the history of Israel and the customs of the dowry and bride selection all show the opposite movement. Nevertheless, God describes the relational transformation as the movement of the male.

Peter may be making use of this interesting unexpected curiosity. Peter’s concern in this verse is with the husband. No Hebrew husband could have missed this allusion. The use of “dwelling with” in Greek employs a sexual connotation that could only be expressed in the Hebrew thought yada. And yada would immediately remind the listener of the first sexual encounter (“and Adam knew Eve his wife”) and the context of that encounter. It would drive the husband deep into his own heritage and the knowledge he had of the original marriage referenced in Genesis 2:24.

Genesis 2:24 provides more than a note on marriage. Its emphasis is found in the two verbs it employs for the change in relationship. Those verbs are forsaking and clinging. “Forsake” is the Hebrew root azav. It is used extensively in the metaphorical sense as apostasy from God. We find it in Deut. 28:20, Judges, 10:10, Jeremiah 1:16. The prophet Isaiah describes Israel’s idolatry with this term. Hosea uses the same word to describe the adultery of Israel. In its negative use (not forsake), it describes the promises of God within the covenant relationship. “Cling” is the Hebrew root dabaq. It is used to describe close affection and loyalty between human beings. But its most important application in Hebrew is the idea that Israel clings to God. This word expresses the required action of the covenant obligation. We find it in Deut. 10:20, 11:22, 30:20, Joshua 22:5 and Jeremiah 13:11. Both words deal with the concept of loyalty. One means to sever the connection, the other means to establish it.

God establishes the marriage covenant as a living human witness to the actions He requires in His covenant. We are to “forsake” the old family loyalties – our ties to this world – and “cling” to the newly created union. Properly understood, marriage is God’s sacramental symbol of His covenant. This is “yada according to yada”. It is covenant, sacred, holy and symbolic. Clearly, the husband’s obligation in covenant relationship with his wife carries a very heavy spiritual weight.

Of course, in a Christian household, the first order of business is the spiritual condition of the marriage and that entails the full submission of the husband to his Lord and Savior. The covenant relationship that he enjoys with his Lord is to be transferred in like behavior to the covenant relationship with his wife. This requires complete loyalty, fidelity and exclusivity. Without this first step, all the rest of the knowledge he gathers is wasted.

With this background in mind, we can look at the actions that a Christian husband must take. First, he must recognize that his wife requires consideration for no other reason than she is a woman. She is not to be treated as a man. She is special.

Secondly, he is to grant her honor. The word for “grant” is aponemontes. It means “to assign, to bestow or to give”. All of these terms are expression of recognition of position. The word for “honor” is timen. Peter uses this word when he describes the final revelation of our faith at the return of Christ. Obviously, this is a word of some importance. We do not grant honor or assign honor to those whom we consider inferior. Clearly, Peter has no notion of superior and inferior ranking. The two words together indicate recognition of proper position – a position that is worthy of honor. The husband is to deliberately give by consent honor to his wife. The full range of meanings for timen includes respect, value, dignity and worth. In the context of Peter’s letter, the Old Testament image of honoring God must have been on the minds of his readers. Furthermore, such a word would recall the commandment “Honor your father and mother”, an ethical stipulation that carried tremendous weight in ancient cultures. The import of this phrase can be seen in the next thought, “as a fellow-heir of the grace of life”.

“Fellow heir” is really “co-heir” (sugkleronomoi). This word comes from two Greek words which mean “allotments together”. It is even stronger than “fellow-heir”. It suggests one allotment shared by both parties. It is not an equal lot but the same lot. Here is a word that perfectly pictures God’s plan for marriage – one flesh sharing in one purpose. In this case, the husband is to ensure his partner is sharing the same allotment in “the grace of life” – charitos zoes. Charitos is from charis, the word for grace, rejoice, joy, pleasure, gratification, acceptance, kindness, benefit, thanks and gratitude. We can see how all encompassing this expression is. Marriage is a single allotment of grace, rejoicing, joy, pleasure, gratification, acceptance, kindness, benefit, thanks and gratitude. The husband is responsible to ensure that all of these attributes of charitos occur in his marriage. This is the result of “yada according to yada”. These are covenant attributes.

Peter concludes this verse with a thought that should cause every Christian man to sit up. He says that just as there is a purpose (“likewise”), there is also a goal. The strategy Peter outlines for wives (purpose and goal) is repeated. In both cases, the goal is intensely personal. For Christian wives, it is the redemption of their unbelieving husbands. For Christian husbands, it is so that your prayers may not be hindered.

The goal of bestowing honor and acting according to knowledge within the marriage is so that your prayers may not be ekkoptesthai (literally, “cut off”). The picture here is cutting a branch from a tree. This is a clear reminder of Jesus’ analogy of the vine and the branches. The result of “cutting off” is to render the branch incapable of producing fruit. The phrase actually says, “that your offering of prayers may not be cut off”. What an amazing claim! Peter is saying that marital harmony, the responsibility of the husband, has a direct affect on the effectiveness of prayer. There is a saying, “Happy wife, happy life”. But according to Peter, more than life in this world is at stake. “An honored wife yields a spiritually effective life”.

Think about what is really guaranteed in life. What is one hundred percent certain? The answer is a pretty short list. The joke used to be dying and paying taxes. I’m not so sure about the paying taxes part, but dying, that’s certain. Not one of us will escape this guarantee. What else comes to mind?

Not fame and fortune, no matter how much we would like to believe it otherwise. There is no certainty that even if we do everything right, the result will be wealth or recognition. Everyone knows this although we would much rather entertain the delusion that somehow it will turn out differently. After all, the delusion fosters hope. This times things might be different. (In the end, of course, we all really know that “you can’t take it with you”).

What about happiness? Again, we prefer the delusion to the reality. The number of personal and global sorrows surely speaks the truth. Not happiness, health, joy, peace or any other long list of sought after consolations.

Life does seem to guarantee some of those things that we would rather avoid. I know no one who has avoided sorrow or pain, heartache or disappointment. If we are brutally honest about things, it might seem that the only real guarantees are on the negative side of the ledger. We can be assured that things will not always work out, that we will have our share of discouragement and defeat. The human condition seems to be what the Greeks noted centuries ago – a brief spark rising in the eternal night.

But just a minute. Maybe things aren’t quite so bleak. Maybe the focus of our deliberate delusions is misplaced. There are some pretty powerful guarantees; they just don’t seem to be the sorts of things that we normal seek.

Twelve step people know about one of these guarantees. The Twelfth Step begins with the words, “Having had a spiritual awakening as a result of these steps”. Now that is a guarantee. It says that if I follow the steps, a spiritual awakening will happen. Not that it might happen, not that it could happen, but that it absolutely, positively will happen. In other words, if I do the work, the result is certain. The problem is not the guarantee but rather the fact that this particular reward doesn’t have much luster in the modern world. Not many of us really seek a spiritual awakening. We would rather have gold. It’s interesting that Jesus commented on this mis-direction. He said that we should lay up treasures in heaven. Why? Because treasures in heaven are guaranteed. They are not subject to moth and corruption. Another way of saying that in this world, everything can (and often does) go wrong, fall apart, get lost, fail. But not in heaven. Treasures in heaven are certain. Our problem seems to be not that there are no guarantees of positive things, but that there are no guarantees of positive things right now. After all, heaven is someplace else. I can’t pay today’s bills with a heavenly credit card.

So, is that what I am left with? Nothing guaranteed in this life except the negative stuff – pain, suffering, failure, loss – and positive guarantees only in the next life. At this point a local minister may interject, “Well, if Jesus himself could not avoid pain, suffering and mistreatment at the hands of others, what would ever make you expect that you could or should? After all, he was the least deserving of any human being, and yet these things happened to him too. What more evidence do you need to prove that it is just part of the human condition?”

A good point, but not very comforting. Buddhist masters may have recognized this latent truth about living when they proclaimed that the only way to peace in this world is to be disconnected from this world – to live life deliberately shunning all attachments that might bring about sorrows. Good advice, but pretty hard to accomplish. Most of us just are connected, whether we like it or not, and trying to disconnect seems to bring just another round of troubles. Just try to unhook from the constant hassle of bills, notices, documents and phone calls and you’ll see what I mean.

There must be some other way. I am not Jesus. And I am not Buddha. But I don’t want to be Job either.

With a little reflection, we may find the Jesus’ life gives us another clue about what is certain. Jesus was a remarkable Zen master in his own right. He was disconnected from the distractions of living. Remember what he said about not having a place to lay his head. And what he said about the Father’s care of the sparrows. But the clue that we really get from Jesus is not about de-tachment but about the proper place for real attachment. It is found in the theology of the word charis, which we see translated as “grace”. Throughout the Old and New Testaments, this word carries a very special meaning. It calls forth a word picture and the picture is this – a powerful monarch, a ruler beyond question, absolute, unapproachable decides, for no reason except his own, to bestow upon the poor, unworthy, and undeserving, a wonderful gift – a gift majestic in proportions, far beyond the hopeful imagination of the recipient. And the amazing fact about this gift is that it is the king who guarantees it. The gift does not depend in the slightest on the worthiness or unworthiness of the recipient. It cannot be bought, earned, begged for, bartered, or negotiated. Gee! It’s free!

Now that we see that this gift is guaranteed, maybe things aren’t so heavy on the negative side. What Jesus showed us is that God’s love toward us in guaranteed, not by what we do but by who He is. So, no matter what happens to us in the realm of being human (all of those things on the negative side), none of that can alter God’s love toward us. And now we can see where Jesus placed his attachment and why. Jesus, the Zen master, knew perfectly well that this human realm comes with sorrow and suffering. So he hooked himself to the one unshakable, unbreakable gift that is guaranteed no mater what happens in this life – God’s unfailing love.

Does that mean things will be peachy? Nope. Does it mean my life will somehow all make sense in the end? Not necessarily. Does it mean that I will escape the toils and tribulations that fall on the “just and the unjust”. Certainly not. What it means is that grace can become the touchstone of my life. That I can experience God’s gift, and share that gift, precisely because I live in a very imperfect world. Grace is the bondage breaker, the exception to the rule, the counter-evidence. Grace proves life is no cruel joke.

The best part about grace is that it is not a one party verb. It cannot occur in the singular. Grace is found only in community. As it is between God and me, so it is between you and me. If I am to experience grace, I must partake of the relationship where it is found. If I am to be graceful, I must pass on what I find to someone else. Grace carries a hidden guarantee – it guarantees that the more I experience grace, the more I will be related to others. Grace entails love.

And with eyes of grace, I just might find something else that is guaranteed. Hidden away behind this dark screen.

Joy.