New Thoughts (01/10/11-01/15/11)
The verses we have before us in this study are quite likely favorites. There is something in us that just loves this sense of carte blanche in regard to God. Believe and you receive! Woohoo! I got the power! And how greatly the fleshly side of our nature wants it to be just that way without any further considerations. We all have in us that same hunger that Simon the magician felt upon seeing the apostles in action. Never mind purpose, just hand me that power. I’ll pay. But, that is an attitude that displays such a thorough ignorance of both the power and the God Who is the Power as earned Simon the severest rebuke. We deserve no less if we allow ourselves to operate under such delusions.
You see, our tendency is to view this as an unconditional promise. Yes, there is that condition of belief, but our conception of belief suddenly bends upon meeting this passage. We’re pretty sure that as it applies here, belief is just a matter of convincing ourselves, conning ourselves if necessary. So, belief becomes a matter we think we can work up. If we get the atmosphere just right, maybe that’ll do it. It’s like we’re taking our opinion out on a date and hoping to get lucky. Or maybe I just need to pray harder. Never allowing the thought to arise that we have just taken up the game plan of the Baal worshipers of old. Indeed, so enamored are we of the apparent promise of this passage that we don’t even stop to consider how we might find such a faith as has no least seed of doubt.
It has served me well that our Sunday morning studies have been contemplating the tale of Elijah and his confrontation with the priests of Baal just as I come to these passages, for the two combine to give a particularly useful picture by which to understand what Jesus declares here. Elijah, as one watches him go through that challenge and its aftermath, is clearly not a man whose confidence is strong because he himself is strong. Indeed, his confidence comes and goes, just as it does with any of us. Up there on Mount Carmel, he acts with a certainty that is most admirable. But, so very few days later we find him on a different mountain, hiding for fear of his life. Has God changed? No. Has Baal changed? No. What has changed, then? We can make it simple, and note that Elijah allowed his eyes to be distracted from the kingdom purposes of God, and this would be quite accurate. But, there is another fundamental that needs to be recognized. On Mount Carmel, Elijah had confidence for one reason, and one reason only: He knew with an absolute certainty that the actions he undertook were in perfect accord with God’s plan. If he had faith, it was because he had already heard from God what he was to do, and now he was just walking it out. Thereafter, having heard Jezebel’s threats, he neglects to seek command, so far as we are given to know. He doesn’t go back to God for instruction, but just starts running, and continues to run until God pulls on the brakes (1Ki 18-19).
This bit of history really must inform how we understand Jesus’ words in the current passage. It is also necessary that we bear in mind the setting, in this case, and I think we really need to be mindful not only of the physical details, but more importantly, of what sorts of thoughts were running through the disciples’ minds when Jesus determined to teach them this particular lesson. This must, of course, lead us into speculation, which has its risks. But, in this case, I suspect that the risks are necessary to protecting ourselves from excess.
Start by once more considering what Peter and the others must have felt at seeing this tree destroyed. I sincerely doubt that they recognized the prophetic significance of that act at the time. The shock of Jesus doing something so out of character, at least as they thought they knew Him, seems the more likely cause for Peter to have blurted out his having noticed the tree’s death. I become more and more convinced that Peter’s reaction is that of a wounded sense of his hero. It’s as close as he can bring himself to, “how could You?”
The setting we have for Luke’s version of this message is rather less clear, as it seems to be one snippet amongst many that he has gathered together. As such, I have chosen to weave it into this same situation. One gets a certain sense of a flow that way. Peter has pointed the tree out to Jesus, and Jesus responds by saying that any one of them could to the same, if. If you have faith that knows know doubt, you’ll do the same thing! Well, I don’t know about Peter specifically, but I can easily suppose there were a few ears perking up at this news. We could do stuff like that? Cool! And all it takes is this faith issue? Well, then! Increase our faith, Jesus! Pump us up! Really, given the swings of opinion we see in Peter on occasions such as the foot washing, it could well be that he’s right there with the rest on this one. But, Jesus, by way of correction, tells them essentially that if they had any faith at all, they could already be doing the like, killing trees, causing them to relocate elsewhere roots and all.
I would note, however, that nothing is said to suggest why they might wish to do such a thing, or how it might be that such activities would be fitting for God’s representative to do. And that, really, was at the base of Peter’s first broaching the subject, wasn’t it? He’s hoping for some explanation to make sense of why Jesus, the Man of Life, killed a tree in such seemingly arbitrary fashion. I mean, everybody knew the season was far off yet for the tree to bear fruit, so why was He so put off by it having none? Just because He was hungry? Can it really be that He’s that caught up in Himself? It’s never seemed so before. Always, always, He’s had such compassion, such an outward facing concern. How, then, does this act make sense?
If I am correct in where I suppose Peter to be coming from, then I am assured that Jesus is fully aware of what has motivated his comment, and I should expect that what He is saying in response really does address the unspoken question, whether it seems to or not. After all, in so many of His conversations, a surface reading of His answer would lead me to think He’s speaking things unrelated to the question, not that unlike a politician’s standard ploy in debate these days. Just make your points when there’s an opening to speak and give no thought to what led to the opening. But, it’s not like that. Jesus’ words just require more thought. If one takes the time to assess how He has answered the question, one finds that indeed, He has done so marvelously well, just not in a fashion that handed the answer to that one who is questioning, as it were, carte blanche. They’ll have to chew on His words a bit to taste the answer therein. So, too, must we, if we are to garner what He’s driving at, and not just our own desired meaning.
In this case, consider where He starts off with the unspoken question of Peter’s in mind. I find two very key thoughts pop out when I read it in that light. The first is this: “Your prayers and requests of God are just as powerful. You can do this, too.” In that, I find a bit of caution for Peter and the gang. Whereas we tend to read this and get this tingle of excitement at thinking of the power that is set in our mouths by this seeming promise, it ought instead to make us very careful in considering what we pray. I don’t wish to bend this into the rather warped perspective that our words have power. Our words do not have power. For all that, our prayers do not have power, nor does our faith. God has power. If I lose sight of that, then I have wandered almost immediately into the realm of heresy.
Next, let me carefully consider the conditional clause that Jesus applies to this. “If you have faith and do not doubt … If you believe that you shall have what you prayed for …”. And, as I have culled out as my key verse for this passage, pay very close attention to the first part of His response in Mark’s account. “Have faith in God” (Mk 11:22). That is the lynchpin to the whole affair. Having faith in general accomplishes nothing. Believing a matter, however hard we have labored to convince ourselves that our belief is accurate, has no value whatsoever unless what we believe is the Truth. Oh! How we need to understand this! Truth is not relative. My truth, if it be Truth, cannot but be the same as yours, and all of it must either concur perfectly with God’s Truth or be error. There’s no shading of this. Faith that believes anything other than God’s Truth is of no value. None!
This is the difference between the Hollywood sort of belief, or the Peter Pan sort of belief that thinks somehow wishing the thing hard enough will make it so, and the faith of which the Apostles write which is so certain as to lead to a hope that would more accurately be spoken of as an absolute certainty. By the faith, the belief, the conviction which God has brought into existence within us, we are made certain of our salvation, we are granted to know God sufficiently well as to know absolutely that His promises are indeed yea and amen. We have seen so much evidence of His Good and Perfect character and of His Mercy towards us as to realize that our Good Shepherd simply does not lose sheep – ever! Our security is that real. The benefits that accrue to us as adopted sons of His household are that real. Whatever life holds in store for us as we measure life in this plane, we know that we know that we know that the real Life, the Life of the soul, continues on and for us, that continuance shall be in heaven’s realms, rejoicing in the presence of our Lord, our King, our Husband, our Brother, our Friend, our Shepherd. And that Life shall be forever, forever freed from the weight and entanglements of sin, forever freed from the pains and aches and guilt of sin’s consequence. Life! That is the certainty of the believer, not the vain and wishful hope.
I labor this because this is the rock-solid sort of belief that Jesus is pointing to as He sets out the conditions: faith beyond any shadow of doubt, faith that is fundamentally and necessarily in God. This is not faith on some sinusoidal curve. There is no charge decay to be concerned with. There’s no gym we can go to where we can train so as to pump it up. There is, in this sense, no having too little faith (and here, I tread carefully, for there are things of Scripture that must remain in balance). This, however, is the point being made by our Lord over in Luke. “If you had faith like a mustard seed.” If He were not so merciful, He may as well have stopped after the fourth word. “If you had faith,” there would be no issue you couldn’t deal with, no necessary activity in God’s service beyond you, no necessary miracle that would not transpire at your simplest request or command. There would be nothing you could not do.
What, then, is faith? This really deserves an entire and lengthy study all of its own, but let me explore it rather briefly here. There are places within the Christian spectrum today where faith is really thought of as a power in its own right. In such places, there is a tendency to suppose that it is something that waxes and wanes within the individual believer. This, in turn, leads to the rather horribly confused belief that if God isn’t answering our requests, it can only be that our faith isn’t strong enough. Bzzt! Wrong answer! Our faith, in that regard, has never had an ounce of strength and never shall! It’s not a muscle that needs exercising. It’s not a battery that needs charging. It’s a gift given us by God Himself, and that in full measure as He has determined the measure. There’s nothing to add to it, as the apostles supposed there in Luke 17:5. It’s either there because God has granted it to you or it’s not because He hasn’t.
Let’s take a look at the meaning of this word faith, in addition to its source. Faith, at root, is a matter of being convinced by the arguments. Of course, we can become convinced by clever arguments, or by the simple wish for it to be true, that something utterly false is true. However, it ought to be clear that no matter how fully we believe a falsehood to be true, it will not thus be made true. However fully convicted you might be that 2 + 2 = 6, you will continue to be wrong. Having faith in your answer does not make it accurate. So, we must qualify this concept of faith for use in the Christian arena. Faith needs a trustworthy object in order to be trustworthy itself. Thus, we are to understand that there is an assumed precursor to faith, that being such knowledge of truth as leads us to not only agree that this is true, but to have confidence in that truth. Thus, faith, for our purposes, is very specific: It is faith in God, having arisen from His gift to us. God is Truth. Our faith, then, if it is to have value to us, must be firmly planted upon God. Furthermore, our faith in God must be of a nature that knows God. Look at this again: Faith assumes knowledge of truth. Faith assumes knowledge of God Who is Truth.
Since this faith we are discussing remains a gift from this very God, there may well be a period in the early days of our having been granted salvation, that we know God is real, but we really don’t know a great deal about Who He Is, and what His character is. But, if we are taking Him at His Word, then we will quickly come to realize that it is our duty and our desire as His children to learn more about that very thing. Here, indeed, we rapidly discover the trustworthiness of Jesus’ promise that if we seek, we shall find (Mt 7:7). So, again, we have this very important introductory point made by Jesus, “Have faith in God.” Faith of any other sort is of no value. Faith in any conception of God other than His own is of no value. Believing God to be something He is not, or that He would act in a fashion contrary to the way He would act is no different than believing that 2 + 2 = 6. You can believe it all you want, but it will never be True.
The math example I have provided here ought to be clear enough that we should recognize that what we have in this passage is not a prayer wildcard. I cringe to see the way that The Living Bible has rendered this. “You can get anything-anything you ask for in prayer-if you believe” (Mt 21:22). REALLY? So, if I pray to be a genius on the level of say, Albert Einstein, with the income of Bill Gates and the charisma of some movie star, and I really, really, really believe it so hard it just makes my teeth ache, then I’ll wake up tomorrow to discover this is so? You know it’s not going to happen. If I pray that the rules of math would change to suit my tastes, that the company that might be folding will instead turn out to prosper beyond all imagination, that the president and other politicians currently in power really do have the country’s best interest at heart and not just their own jobs: All of these things will just pop into existence? How about if I pray that God would condone my particular sins. Can I really expect that this would work just because I believe they are not sins? Do I suppose my prayer could rewrite God’s rulebook?
All of these things, I should think, demonstrate the ridiculousness of even trying to pretend that this promise has no qualifier attached besides the strength of our belief. Listen very carefully. Take Matthew’s presentation: “If you have faith and do not doubt.” What is that matter of doubt? It is set in clear parallel to the point made about faith. Doubt, in this case, is a matter of hesitation, or being of two minds. It is, “to be at variance with oneself” as Thayer has it. There’s uncertainty. Somewhere deep inside, however much we’ve tried to work up faith and belief, we’re really not absolutely sure that God’s going to answer.
There are two potential causes for this. The first is that we really don’t trust God so as to take Him at His word, in which case this probably ought to be the first object of our prayer. Indeed, it would be tempting to suppose this was clear evidence that the salvation we suppose ourselves to possess in not real. But, really, it’s just that we have not yet matured in the grace He has shown us. We have not yet come to know Him with Whom we have to do. Whether for lack of effort or for lack of the realization that this is something we ought desire, we just haven’t really settled with ourselves Who He Is. Maybe we haven’t had sufficient experience of Him to recognize His trustworthiness, to have the proof of experience informing us of His faithfulness. If this is the issue, then we again need to pray for that knowledge of Him that would bring us to confidence, and to expend the effort of studying His Word that we might more readily recognize His marvelous character.
The second factor is more directly in my sights today, and that is that the thing we are praying is not prayed with kingdom purpose. The sorts of things I suggested a few paragraphs ago, these are not prayers that reflect a heart seeking first the kingdom. These are the sorts of prayers, the ATM prayers, that seek first personal benefit and really don’t have much thought for God’s will other than being pretty certain He ought to bless me because I’m His child. No concern is shown for His authority. No concern is felt for whether I’ve been a good child or an indifferent one, or even a particularly bad one. It shouldn’t matter, right? Because He’s a good father, so it really doesn’t amount to much whether I am. It is a mindset that reflects an attitude of “I deserve better.” If this is the case, then we have no basis for expecting answer. Indeed, our prayer ought immediately divert into the course of, “Change my heart, O God!”
Listen! You cannot have the necessary conditions Jesus lays out here, you cannot be free of doubt and unhesitant, except that your prayer is clearly and accurately aligned with the purpose of God. Unless your faith, reflected in your prayer, is in God. It is fundamental to the arrangement. God is not so stupid as to oblige Himself to answer our every request, no matter how inane, no matter how detrimental to world and self. God is in control. More to our benefit even than that, God is rational. He is not some chaotic and willful superpower like we find in Greek mythology. He is not somebody whose behavior is particularly erratic and Whom we hope to appease well enough that He at least won’t destroy us on a whim. God doesn’t act on a whim. He has purpose. He has a purpose that has been planned in infinite detail since before the dawn of creation. And, recall that in that planning, He has ever and always known the end, having known the end from the beginning. He is not surprised, not by you, not by Satan, not by anything. His knowledge of the entire course of Creation start to finish is, and always has been perfect.
Prayer, my friend, changes things. But, it doesn’t change God. God does not change. If our prayers, since we often know not how we ought to pray (Ro 8:26), are quite capable of going off the tracks, would we really want to have God answering us in literal fashion? Would we really want Him bound by His own choice to answer us according to the answer we think best? Or would we prefer a God Who answers us as truly is best? Again: He has perfection of knowledge, a viewpoint on our situation that far exceeds our own. He has perfection of wisdom, that what He knows He can fashion into an answer perfectly suited to address the situation for the maximum benefit to ourselves and to Himself. Your talking about the God Who was able to arrange our salvation, in our sins, while we hated Him, and yet do so in a fashion that did not in any wise violate His innate Justice! And you would really prefer Him to answer according to your lights? Maybe you would. For my own part, no, not on your life!
So, I arrive back at this point where I have chosen to weave in Luke’s account. The disciples have heard this first response, and if my supposition is right, there is something happening. The flesh is rising up. It has heard this opening point of Jesus in the very fashion that so many do today. It has heard pretty much what The Living Bible was suggesting: unlimited and unbounded power. They fall into that very same error of supposing that if faith is the key to this power, then faith must be the real power. So, they’re on Jesus to give them more of that good stuff. “Oh, yeah! Increase our faith, so that we can do this sort of stuff!” Admittedly, it is not absolutely guaranteed that this is the sort of thinking that ran through their heads. But, though apostles, they were men such as ourselves. It was true at the height of their ministries. It’s most assuredly true here while school is still in session for them. They have fleshly reactions just as we ourselves do. It’s easy to eschew power when you have none. But, when it’s on offer and being handed out?
So, we see this misconception in their thinking. They’ve been told enough times that they are men of little faith. Now, they are hearing that faith has this side-benefit of power. Faith is the genii apparently. You rev it up and poof! Your wish is granted. Isn’t that what He just said? Just believe it hard enough and it shall be! Yeah, baby! That’s for me!
And how does Jesus respond? “If you had faith even the size of a mustard seed…” I have no doubt said this already, but it’s worth the repetition. Jesus could have stopped short on that sentence and it would, I suspect, be much clearer to us what He was getting at. “If you had faith…”. It’s not gradations of faith. It’s not. It is one of the greatest disservices done to Christianity that we have this whole movement out there that is teaching folks that if their prayers aren’t getting answered – however off base and misguided – it’s not the prayer that’s off, it’s their faith that is defective. Well start with this, folks: It’s not their faith to begin with! It is the gift of God, not of works (and not of working up) (Eph 2:8-9). If, then, you wish to blame the failure of your prayer on the quality or strength of your faith, then you are in reality accusing God of giving you a defective gift! This is clearly errant thinking and demonstrates a complete failure to recognize the God Who Is. It ought to be denounced for the blasphemy that it is, this whole blame it on faith thing. The problem is not with the faith God gave you. The problem is with the direction of your prayer. The problem is that you think you can tell Him how to answer and what to answer and when to answer. The problem is that you really don’t think God is any different than the idols of old, just another power to be manipulated and controlled by you. It is this thinking that lets people who should really know better fall into a form of prayer that is all but indistinguishable from incantation, and they don’t even see it.
God help them. God, set them free. God, reveal Yourself to them with a clarity that would cast asunder all such misconceptions as to Who You Are.
Look. The whole thrust of Jesus’ response to this request from His students amounts to this: There’s nothing here that needs increasing. Faith doesn’t need pumping up, doesn’t need to be plugged into some socket to recharge. What faith needs is a reason for belief, and there’s only one reason sufficient. That one reason is knowing with utmost certainty that our course and our prayer is truly aligned with God’s plan and purpose. Had Jesus (were such a thing even conceivable) sought to curse the fig-tree out of a fit of pique, on a whim, in a purposeless and self-serving gesture, then rest assured that tree would have still been standing. That is true of Him, though it be inconceivable that He should act in such fashion. It is doubly true for us, for whom ungodly actions and requests are thoroughly conceivable.
As much as I deride The Living Bible for their handling of the promise we see in Matthew and Mark, it manages to bring home the nature of the apostles’ request here in Luke: One day the apostles said to the Lord, “We need more faith; tell us how to get it.” Then, let me turn to The Message to relay the response: “You don't need more faith. There is no ‘more’ or ‘less’ in faith.” That’s the point! That’s the central matter we need to correct if we find our thinking traveling down these avenues. There are a couple of footnotes from the New English Translation that are of value here, as well. The request the apostles are making is not for a gift of faith, but for an increase to the depth of their faith. Fine. But, in commenting on what Jesus says, the point is reiterated that the issue is not the amount of faith, but its presence. Pure and simple. It’s there or it isn’t. To ask, then, for this increased depth is a misconception which Jesus is correcting by His reply, and that same correction must be carried back and combined with what we have in Matthew and Mark, that we might attain to the whole council of Scripture on this matter.
In that regard, I must also take time to consider some of those other passages which would seem to support the viewpoint the apostles displayed here. The first of these which comes to mind is that point in Matthew’s account when Jesus comes down from the Mount of Transfiguration to find His disciples trying in vain to deal with a demonically induced case of epilepsy. He, of course, is able to evict said demon with immediate effect, which leads His disciples to query Him as to what the problem had been. Jesus replies, “Because of the littleness of your faith” (Mt 17:20). Indeed, we find Him relaying what amounts to a combining of the examples found in passages under consideration here. Faith even so large as a mustard seed could cause this mountain to relocate. Nothing would be impossible to one with such a faith.
OK, so should we take this as indicating that our faith is maybe some sort of balloon-like reservoir that needs refilling, maybe, as we drain it off by use? We could add in those many times that Jesus looked at the twelve and said, “Oh, ye of little faith.” Yet, I am returned to the same point I arrive at in considering Luke’s account. By not saying there is an outright absence of faith, Jesus is being rather kind. Absence of faith would suggest a terminal condition impossible to change. Smallness, however, allows the opportunity that it could grow. At least it’s there, right? So, if it’s there, there’s still hope. There’s still a chance.
Let me consider a passage that comes post-Ascension. Paul, in addressing the Roman church, has been led by the Holy Spirit to address issues of unity and equality, particularly as applied to the possible distinctions to be drawn between Gentile (Romans to be specific) and Jew. His thrust is constant: There is no distinction of any value. Both are equally guilty before God, and therefore equally in need of something outside themselves to provide redemption. Both have that Redeemer in Jesus the Christ of God. In the course of setting out his case, Paul considers the example of Abraham, so very important in Jewish thought as being the father of the nation. Indeed, he remains important to us as father of many nations. But, the question which needed addressing was: in what way father? If by the flesh, then ought not the descendants of Ishmael have equal claim? But, of course, the fundamental issue was not lines of descent, genetic inheritance of some sort. The fundamental issue was that of God’s Promise, and the faith which found acceptance therein.
So, in the course of this explanation, Paul explains what it was that made Abraham special, which is the same characteristic which defines the true descendant of Abraham. He has been describing the physical reality which belonged to Abraham and Sarah at the time of Jacob’s conception, and thereby making plain the impossibility of the event, naturally speaking. Then, we arrive at this: “Yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief” (Ro 4:20). Let me stop there. Notice the parallel to the doubting Jesus says must not be in mind. Ho hesitancy, no wavering, double-minded perspective as to what God will do.
Continuing: “But [he] grew strong in faith, giving glory to God.” OK, this is the bit that must be dealt with in the current context. The big question that must be answered is what it was that grew strong. Well, let’s see: The verb here is in passive voice, suggesting the subject receives the action as opposed to performing the action. Faith, it must be observed, is the object of a preposition, not the subject. Faith did not grow strong. Faith describes how that which grew strong did so. If we are to suppose that faith was what grew strong, the same must be considered true as to unbelief being that which staggered or wavered. The verbs in both cases are in the same mood, tense and voice. So, we would need to treat both of them in the same way. If it was faith which grew strong, then it was unbelief which wavered. Yet, we would never be inclined to consider unbelief in that fashion. Likewise, we must reject consideration of faith in that fashion. It was Abraham who received the impact of whichever object applied. It was Abraham who would either be weakened and wavering because of unbelief, or be strengthened because of faith.
Take this back into the case of those disciples trying to cast out demons, and I think we must see the same thing applying. There either is belief that God is going to do what was being asked, or there isn’t. There isn’t some sliding scale between those two poles such that, if we can just move the needle enough to the right, there’ll be enough faith-juice to get the job done. There’s no battery that needs to be attached and charged up. There’s no draining short that’s causing our faith to leak out between uses. It either is or it isn’t. After all, if some portion of faith no larger than a mustard seed is enough to disrupt the natural order with more power than even the strongest bombs of any military, what need is there for more?
Let me note at this point that some would maintain that there are varieties of faith. There is that faith we speak of as salvific faith, that which all must of necessity accept is a gift of God, given as He has said so rather clearly. Here, even those of the faith movement will accede, it is clearly an is or isn’t proposition. Here, there is nothing you need to build up or keep charged up. It is the gift of God. Now, we might debate as to whether it is possible to lose this gift and there will be those who are certain you can (which I suppose must then decide God might take back what He has given), and those who are just as certain that you cannot, being as God is not a man that He should repent of His decisions. But, either way, in this instance the faith is either present unto salvation or absent unto damnation, and once more there’s no spectrum of possibility in between. On or off. That’s the only choices.
I can, however, look to the definitions of faith offered by Zhodiates and see that some make a distinction between this sort of faith and that by which the apostles were enabled to perform miracles. I suppose those who think in this fashion must likewise include those prophets of old who were likewise enabled to perform miracles. Now, Zhodiates would most certainly reject the idea that such miraculous deeds were even possible today, holding as he does that the gift of doing so passed from the stage with the apostles themselves. I find no cause to suggest that this is the case, although I would hold that the great majority of what is passed off as being in that category today is chicanery.
What I am more inclined to concentrate on, though, is whether indeed there is reason to suppose that there are different sorts of faith involved. For, if there are, then perhaps that faith which works miracles is of a different nature than that which leads to salvation. Perhaps that faith, that miracle-working faith, really does need to be exercised, pumped up, recharged, or otherwise managed by the user in order to remain strong enough to be effective. I could look, for example, at Jesus’ habitual withdrawing for prayer after a long day of teaching and healing. Was this to be taken as evidence that the faith-battery needed a recharge even in the God-Man? I’m not sure it would do us any great harm to think so, if it would lead us to more often find such times of communing with God for ourselves. But, I’m not at all certain it would be an accurate view. Let me say it this way: I would find it far more believable that the human nature, the emotions, the physical fatigue and the general drain of facing such pain and sorrow hours on end needed the recharge of being with God for a time. Faith? No, I don’t think Jesus had a faith that knew of doubt. To suppose such a thing, I would have to also suppose that He was not fully God even as He walked in the flesh of man, and this I cannot suppose. To suppose, then, that Jesus had a faith of any sort that needed the occasional pumping up would be to suppose that He didn’t believe Himself, didn’t know Himself.
I can think of any number of situations in which I might doubt myself, have no faith in myself, no belief that I could do what needed doing. But, then, I know I am not God. I am in every way limited by my humanity. Jesus, though, in knowing Himself, was very much aware that indeed He is God. He knew, as we who have been called the children of God struggle to know, that He is not limited by His humanity, for He is God. He knew, first and foremost, that every move He made, every word He spoke, was in perfect accord with the will of God. He knew that in every aspect of life, He did only what He saw the Father doing. Therefore, faith had no reason to doubt and every reason to believe. We arrive back at the fundamental proposition: “Have faith in God.” Nothing else is really faith.
OK, so can I consider this one: We have the man who came to Jesus looking for his son to be healed. In fact, as I look at the passage I have in mind, I find it is the parallel to Matthew 17:20, which was treated earlier here. But, in Mark’s account we have this amazing and well known interjection from the father. Actually, there are two things of great value in the brief conversation between this father and the Son. Note the form of his petition. “If You can do anything, please have pity on us and help” (Mk 9:22-24). Jesus latches onto that petition and replies, “IF You can!?” Brother there’s no ‘IF’ in this equation. All things are possible to him who believes. Hmm. There’s that belief qualifier again. So, our inclination would be to suppose that yes, there is an if involved. But, Jesus just said there isn’t. Who are you gonna believe? Jesus or your lying heart?
Now, the father, hearing this comment, jumps to the same conclusion we are inclined to: “I do believe!” I’ll just click my heels three times here, and all will be well. He believes, if we take him at his word, but really, he’s just trying to get the formula right. If it’s belief that it takes, then I’ll claim belief and then this guy will have to do his bit. But, then, Holy Spirit conviction comes upon the father, because it’s not some exorcist or magician he’s dealing with, it’s the God of Israel in the flesh. So, the truth is exposed: “Help my unbelief.”
I don’t take this stance as a condemnation of this man. The truth is, that in the majority of situations this describes our own condition perfectly. We believe but we suffer unbelief. We are convinced as to our faith and we surely understand the necessity of that faith. And yet, in the things we ask, what we are not certain of is God’s will. We do not have the unshakable confidence that what we seek in our request is in accord with the purposes of Him from whom we are asking it. And somewhere deep inside, thanks once again to the work of the Holy Spirit who leads us into all Truth, we know that however hard we labor to work up this faith that can move mountains, that mountain’s not going anywhere unless God wants it to. We know, however much we may seek to act in ways that deny this knowledge, that the power is not in our faith, not in our prayers, not in our ability to work ourselves into a state (like those prophets of Baal did when challenged by Elijah – oh the shame we ought to feel for even trying!) No! The power is in God and God alone. The power is God and he remains in control. He is not to be manipulated, but to be adored and obeyed.
In that light, if I take the scope of that situation depicted in Mark 9:22-24, I am inclined to accept that what we hear in the father is manipulation giving way to honesty. His true perspective in coming to Jesus was fully contained in the “if” of his request. He doesn’t believe. He hopes, in that wishy-washy way that we might, for instance, hope to win the lottery. It’s not hope with a foundation. It’s wishful thinking. Maybe, just maybe. That same wishful, iffy mindset remains in spite of Jesus’ confident assertion. It remains in spite of what gets blurted out in reply, “Oh! I do believe!” No you don’t sir. If you believed, there would have been no “if” to rebut. The reality is you don’t believe and you and I both know it. Conviction leads to his confession of that very thing. But, here’s the glorious good news! Jesus, my friends, wasn’t talking about your belief. He was referring to His own.
All things are possible to Him who believes. I really think that pronoun ought to have been capitalized here. Now, I know you will be coming to me with that occasion when Jesus was visiting home. This is one of the main support points for the whole faith movement, isn’t it? Matthew is more or less summarizing the closing out of the Galilean phase of Jesus’ ministry, and Jesus is back in Nazareth, teaching and doing as He always did, but the people can’t get past the fact that He’s a local kid, (and they haven’t forgotten the scandal of his birth, either!) His past being too familiar to them, they reject the evidence of His present. Indeed, it says the grew offended with Him (Mt 13:54-58). Why were they offended? Because the reality of His present refused to fit their misconceptions! Notice the questions they are raising, because this is important to the point here: They are asking, “Where did He get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” How can that be right? We know Him, Mary’s boy, and illegitimate at that. How could God possibly be doing what we just saw Him do here? Nope. Unacceptable. Doesn’t fit our theology, I’m afraid. He must be a fake.
So Jesus, seeing their reaction to Him, notes that “A prophet is not without honor except at home.” Then, we are given this brief comment from Matthew. “And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief” (Mt 13:58). Now, folks tend to latch onto this and take the meaning to be that the unbelief of these people somehow overpowered God’s capacity to perform. Or, coming at it from a different angle, they’ll propose that God was legally bound not to do miracles because their unbelief left Him no grounds to do so. My, my, my. God, Who was able to work out this plan to save all whom He so chooses to save in a fashion which perfectly preserves His Justice and yet perfectly displays His mercy to a people who were yet His enemies! And you think He can’t find the means to heal in spite of somebody’s unbelief? What sort of god is it you serve? Mine’s in control! Mine is all-knowing and all-wise, and His mercies are new every morning, and His faithfulness stands to the ages. If my God could be stopped by my weak opposition, then I should be god and He would not be. Don’t you see it?
Now, then: Look carefully at that comment Matthew has made. There is nothing in what he writes that suggests Jesus was blocked, incapable, limited. He writes only that Jesus didn’t do many miracles there – a simple statement of fact – and then he explains why it was that Jesus chose not to do so. Any miracles beyond what He apparently did do (for their offense was at the fact that He did) would serve no purpose. God is a purposeful God. He doesn’t display His power for the fun of it. He doesn’t show off, no matter how often He is asked to. He acts because it suits His purposes. If there are miracles, it is because He has determined that there should be miracles on this occasion, because it best advances His plan. His people perhaps need that extraordinary evidence to fully trust what He is about to accomplish.
Perhaps it is that a particular people group is yet rather simple in their understanding of things, as we might measure it, and so, for them to believe might require the evidence of miracles. On the other hand, in a society such as ours, which would find that same sort of evidence more a sign of attempted deception than a proof, miracles not only don’t serve the purpose of salvation, but might actively militate against it. God’s not stupid. He knows what works with whom, and He knows with whom He intends to work what. What He does, and therefore, the prayers He answers in expected fashion, He does because it is His intent. The prayer that availeth much, my friend, is very simply that prayer which is fully given over to His purpose, just as the faith which has no least grain of doubt is that faith which recognizes and seeks His purpose.
OK, I am reminded by something read last night that I need to consider Mark’s account of that scene from Matthew 13:54, as well, and it is in his account that the idea that Jesus could not do much miraculous arises (Mk 6:1-6). Now, let’s parse the closing part of that passage very carefully: Here, the text says, “He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands upon a few sick people and healed them” (Mk 6:5). Now, notice what is not indicated here: the reason why He could not do much. What follows is this: “And He wondered at their unbelief” (Mk 6:6). Again, no necessary connection is made between the object of His wonder and the cause of His inability. Therefore, if we are to reach the conclusion that unbelief was a true blockage to Jesus’ ability to heal or do other miraculous things, we must do so based on the combined testimony of the two passages.
So, consider well. Matthew says He did not do many miracles because of their unbelief, which Mark notes made Him wonder. Mark also says that He could not do so. The implication that many draw from this combination is, as noted, that unbelief blocked Jesus from acting. But, I tell you that vests far too much power in man and not nearly enough in God. Remember, nothing is impossible to him who believes (Mk 9:23). Jesus didn’t say that this was true so long as everybody else in the area also believes. He said it applied to him who believes, and if there is one thing we can be rock-solid certain of, it’s that Jesus believes!
Listen closely. There is nothing Jesus cannot do now, and there is nothing He could not do then. In reference to His latent power, if you will, His potential, there was nothing that one could set in the category of being beyond His capacity to achieve. Facing arrest, as He rebuked Peter for attacking the police, He makes a very telling point. “Don’t you think I could appeal to My Father, and He would immediately set twelve legions of angels and more at My disposal?” (Mt 26:53). Well, then, what staid His hands on that occasion? One simple thing. It didn’t fit the Father’s plan. “How then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must happen this way?” (Mt 26:54). There is, my friends, precisely one category of item that Jesus could not do and which remains the case for Him forever, and that is to do what is not in full accord with the Father’s plan. Let me lay it out clearly in the words of Jesus Himself: “The Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner” (Jn 5:19). That is the bounding line upon His power and there is no other.
Take that back to the issue there in Nazareth. If there is a could not that applies to Jesus in this instance, it is that the Father does not find that miracles suit His purpose under the circumstance. Does unbelief have something to do with this? Yes and no. I must be careful here, and so must you. You see, if faith is indeed a gift from my Father in heaven, as Scripture declares, then I am forced to concede that the absence of faith is equally left to His determination. I must side with Paul, and thereby with God, that both the redeemed and the reprobate are thus by His choosing, by His choosing whether to manifest Justice alone or Justice combined with Mercy. In either case, He is glorified, whether for the clear justice of having punished the guilty, or for the incredibility of His mercy in allowing that any be saved of this miserable, fallen species.
So, then, I am constrained by the Word of God to accept that both belief and unbelief are by His decree. I shall not get into the grand argument as to how this leaves room for the guilt of the unbeliever and the sinner, which is for another time and place. For now, I am focused on the supposed power of belief and of its absence, that we might once for all shake ourselves from foolishly overestimating ourselves. Being constrained to lay unbelief to His hand, it becomes pretty clear that He is not stopped by what is, after all, under His own control.
Let me take the example of driving an automobile. You are behind the wheel, the engine is running, the gas tank is full. Nothing about the vehicle is faulty in some fashion as might constrain your options. You are traveling along down the road as is your wont. But, ahead lies a stop sign. Now, I ask you: does that sign have some innate power to force you to stop? You know very well that it does not. But, whether for fear of reprisal or the simple sanity of self-preservation, your foot goes onto the brake pedal, and you do what you must to ensure the vehicle ceases motion there at the stop sign, don’t you? No outside power coerced you into such action, but your own will commanded your foot which obeyed.
The same may be said of God and the disposition of that power which is uniquely His, the which we tend to perceive as miracle under certain circumstances. Let us be very, very clear about this: Nothing constrains God’s power except God’s will. How He determines to act is how He acts, and there is no higher power, no higher authority, no anything that constrains Him apart from Himself. This is the great, horrendous error of the whole faith movement, that they have fashioned faith itself into an idol, and invested it with the power to thwart or manipulate God!
Let’s look at a few of the promises that get us so very excited about this whole business of wielding the power to do miracles. “I tell you in truth: The one who believes in Me will do those works I do as I do, and even greater things will he do because I go to the Father” (Jn 14:12). Oh! But, how we love this idea! Why, look! Jesus Himself says we’ll do greater things than He! Do you hear what your pride is saying to you as you think that thought? It says, “I’ll be bigger than Jesus!” We’re right there alongside John, Paul, George and Ringo, ready to claim the glory that has never been our right, and never shall be. Be very clear that Jesus, in making this statement, leaves us with the very same constraints under which He ministered, “Do only what you see the Father doing.”
Take that point in combination with the promise of the very next verse. “Whatever you ask in My name, I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it” (Jn 14:13-14). Holy smokes, but that’s power, isn’t it? All we have to do is tack the name of Jesus to the end of our request and boom! It’s going to be laid at our feet. The world is our oyster, friends! Riches, fame, fortune, women, whatever it is your heart desires, here’s Daddy’s credit card, and there’s no limit!
If you have any sense of any sort, you must realize that this isn’t the way things are. The evidence of two millennia of Christian history should make that pretty plain. Don’t you suppose that somebody, somewhere, even two or three gathered together, have thought to ask God to eradicate cancer and AIDS and other such devastating diseases, and that they have, somewhere in the course of their prayer, probably at the end, spoken the phrase, “in Jesus’ name”? Don’t you think maybe that’s happened at some point? So, then, why do cancer and AIDS and such scourges persist? Did these folks get the magic formula wrong, somehow? Is God a fake? What’s the deal?
The deal is quite simply that the implications of ‘in My name’ are not that this is the mantra that forces God’s hand. The implications of ‘in My name’ are upon and in accord with My authority. In other words, those things that are asked with a clear vision of the will of God as applied to the matter under prayer, which are not only seeking out His purpose, but have found it and aligned to it: These are the prayers that can be assured of answer.
With that, I’m going to come back to the focal passage of this particular study. This morning, I was reading the Bible in Basic English translation of the text, and was taken aback to read this for Mark 11:22: “And Jesus, answering, said to them, Have God's faith.” My immediate reaction was really to be aghast at such a failure to recognize what Jesus was saying, but then I was forced to stop and reconsider. Now, I think the phrasing is rather dangerous in that it is so terribly likely to lead folks down the same path my thoughts first wandered. Gah! They’re suggesting that we can somehow work ourselves up to godlike status! But, no. Let me show you how that actually fits the message.
“Have God’s faith.” Well, first off, that’s the only faith there is, at least of such form as matters. God gives the gift of faith. Therefore, it’s His, isn’t it? But, set that aside. It is the confidence that is peculiar to that faith which God has in Himself that really needs to capture our thinking here. God alone, we understand (or we ought to) can speak of an event yet future, as we perceive the flow of events, with absolute certainty. There is a reason why He informs us that His word does not return to Him without having achieved His purpose (Isa 55:11). What He says goes. Again, this is true for a very simple reason: There is nobody and no thing that can tell Him otherwise. There is nothing that could raise itself up against Him so as to stop Him from achieving all His desire. His faith in what He says, then, is absolute, because He knows His power to impose His will on the situation is absolute. There’s a certain benefit to being the Supreme Being! It is because of this that we can say of Him that His promises are yea and amen. What He has truly said shall come to pass shall indeed truly come to pass.
Our problem is that we tend to apply that certainty to things which are not God’s promises, at least not to us in particular. We seek to appropriate anything and everything positive that God has ever said or even hinted at in regard to anybody in all of history and make it our own. Then, we look to Him and attempt to pull the guilt trip on Him. But, You said… I wonder, are we willing to take that same attitude towards everything and anything negative God has ever said or even hinted at in regard to anybody in all of history? Will we seek to appropriate every curse and every retribution as our own? You know, I think there are those that will, though I don’t think they suppose themselves to be doing so. But, in either case, it is a matter of completely miscomprehending the word of God, and taking its meaning to be as we wish rather than as He intends. We ought be more careful.
So, then, to have God’s faith would require us to have the absolute certainty which is God’s by nature. The only way we, being fallible and extremely limited in vision and knowledge, are ever going to have such certainty is to be clear that what we are doing is indeed God’s plan for us, that what we are seeking is what He is seeking, that what we are asking for is precisely what He desires to have done. This requires a radical shift in our perspective on prayer. It requires that we get out of ATM mode, even get out of the business of asking blessings upon this person and that person, and help for the other, and so on. It requires that we either avail ourselves of those tools He has given us to perceive His will and then pray it, or else simply leave off at praying, “Thy will be done.” These are the safest of words to pray, and perhaps the only ones we can pray with the confidence of having God’s faith. It will be done. You can be sure of it!
This does not preclude us from asking for the provision of our daily needs, for He has told us to do so. But, do so not as beggars. Do so as confident children, knowing He’s already got it scheduled and on the way. Why do we know this? How can we be so confident? Because He has already told us it is so, and if He has said it, it is so. Here is the thing we might want to consider, perhaps the truth that the name it - claim it sort of belief has twisted out of shape: If we cannot seek what we ask of God with the thankfulness of a heart that knows full well that He’s already done not only what we are asking, but far and away beyond what we are asking, then maybe we oughtn’t to be praying that particular point at all. If our prayers have taken on a wheedling, nagging, aren’t You listening sort of tone, then we can be pretty certain that we’re no longer praying in the name of Jesus. We can be pretty certain that we’re no longer even considering the course of “Thy will be done.” We are reduced to the nature of Baal worshipers, and ought not to suppose that God is in any way pleased by such display. Get back to the basics. Get back to remembering Who it is with Whom you seek to deal. Get back to remembering Who He Is and who you are, and that you are, amongst other things His child by His own choosing. Then, let that mindset inhabit your prayers and see if the nature of your requests aren’t renewed in their direction and their accuracy to His purpose.
It remains for me to consider the added instruction of Mark 11:25-26. Now, the latter of those two verses is debated, as to its validity. But, as it does no more than to restate the former verse in the negative, and as it reflects a message given us elsewhere, in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:15), I find no problem with it one way or the other. Included, it is a reminder of the whole council of Scripture, that not only does our forgiving attitude stand as a needful component of believing our prayers are heard, but the absence of such an attitude is reason to expect that God will have a like attitude towards ourselves.
Let’s consider the benefits and the detriments to this idea of not forgiving somebody. So, we’re holding a grudge. What have we gained? We maybe feel a bit of self satisfaction over our clear assessment of this person’s fault. If nothing else, it gives us a chance to feel a little better about ourselves. At least we’re not like him! Oops. Wait. Jesus had something to say about that attitude, didn’t He? But, honestly, holding that grudge, contrary to what some teach today, does not achieve any sort of real power over the one we’re so offended by. It does nothing. It does not correct the wrong. It does not get damages repaid. It just makes us bitter and unpleasant to be with. Well, that’s some revenge, isn’t it?
Over against these fine benefits, we must contemplate the disadvantages. OK. Let’s start with the more mundane issues. That bitterness and anger that we allow to fester within is unhealthy. I’m not talking about mentally or spiritually unhealthy in this case, although both those would apply as well. But, physically, these attitudes do you absolutely no good and potentially do a world of harm to you. Ulcers and migraines and all manner of other issues lie in that direction. Why, then, would you wish to travel there? Then, if self-interest in this life is insufficient to move your attitude in a better direction, there’s the matter Jesus brought up, if not here, then in the Sermon on the Mount. If you don’t forgive these things done by your fellow, neither will Father forgive you for the things you have failed Him in. And, unlike yourself, when the Father withholds His forgiveness, it’s powerful. Unforgiven, you remain under the penalty of Justice. The full weight of your sins remains upon you, and that demands Justice, when that day of judgment comes, hand down a guilty verdict, with the sentence of death which every sin earns.
So, on the one hand, you may gain a certain emotional satisfaction, the soothing balm of having lied to yourself. But, that ego-stroke comes at the cost of eternity. Really seems worth it, doesn’t it? Then, there is the implication of Jesus noting this point as a part of this particular message. He has just been explaining the incredible privilege of prayer, and the powerful effectiveness of that prayer which pursues God’s purpose, seeks and serves God’s agenda. Then, there is this shift to the matter of forgiving. But, Jesus, that most purposeful and effective of teachers, has not just jumped track onto some new theme to teach upon. It’s part of the same message. It’s still about prayer, and it’s still about our attitude towards prayer.
Indeed, it could be argued that His inclusion of this admonition with regard to forgiveness as a prerequisite for prayer only strengthens my argument that His primary point in the rest of the message is that God’s purpose, His will, is likewise a prerequisite for prayer, as it is only in the sound knowledge that we are in accord with Him that we can have that faith which knows no doubt. Continuing that thought, we are now told that we cannot expect to be in a position that knows no doubt if we are in the process of setting ourselves up for an eternal condemnation. It’s connected! But, don’t go all off the point here, and think that it’s your prayer that’s powerful, that it’s you that’s powerful. That’s not the point.
The point is confidence in prayer, yes, but that confidence is only found in knowing Who you’re dealing with. If you know Him, more importantly, if He knows you, then you know enough to seek His will and you love Him enough to desire His will. At the same time, if you know Him, you remain aware of His majesty, and though you are confident of His love, yet you would never willingly offend by coming before Him in so unworthy and ungracious a fashion as bearing this grudge. You would dread the thought, knowing, as is implied, that having come in such fashion, you are but earning the wrath of this One Whose love you seek to lay hold of. It would be entirely counter-productive, then, to come to Him in prayer when you are purposefully setting yourself at odds with His instruction. How shall you have unshakable faith in being heard by One Who has every reason to strike you down under the circumstances in which you come to Him? Why should you expect any good thing from One you thus snub, disrespect and disregard? Would you be gracious under such treatment? You are already demonstrating that you would not! Your prayers are hindered. But, understand that God’s purposes are not. You’re not that great.
Now, then: What are these instructions we are given? If you have anything against anyone. Stop there for a moment. It’s not your brother, so there’s no point in even raising the question of who your brother is. It’s not your fellow believer. It’s about anyone, the bag-boy at the grocery store, the government officials that don’t seem to govern, the boss that gave you a less than stellar review, the child who ignores your commands, the parent who did you wrong, the guy who tosses trash out the car window that winds up on your lawn: anyone.
Notice what He isn’t saying here: He does not say, if anyone has sinned against you. Nope. Doesn’t say that. It’s simply, if you have anything against anyone. You know, we might want to get clear on this matter. David was. “Against Thee, Thee only, I have sinned” (Ps 51:4). However much we may have wronged another, the sin is against God alone. However much we may have been wronged by another (and therefore have something against them), it is against God alone that they have sinned, and the matter of sin therefore remains between them and God. The sin is none of our business and none of our power to address anyway, at least not as concerns the message Jesus delivers here.
The key to grasping this point might be to consider the particular sorts of things Jesus says our Father will forgive us under the circumstance of our forgiving others. They are transgressions. Here, He is using the term paraptoomata. Ergo, He is not using the term hamartia, which would be the more common term for sin. Hamartia indicates an action taken, we might say, a conscious and deliberate sin. Most literally, it has the meaning of missing the mark, erring, and therefore having no share in the prize. Zhodiates notes another term, parabasis, which is more commonly found where transgression is used in translation. There, we have the same prefix of para, indicating near or beside, but the root is baino, indicating a foot or a pace, thus to transgress is to pace contrary to commandment, to violate a command, which makes it a conscious, willful decision. Paraptoomata is more a lapse or deviation. It’s a slip up. The para of nearness is now attached to pipto indicating to fall. So, we fall near the goal, but off to one side. We’re not on the mark, but we’re trying.
Maybe, if we want to use this targeting image, we could consider that hamartia is so wild a shot that the target is completely untouched, and the arrow has buried itself somewhere in the turf. Indeed, it would be hard to look at the fall of that arrow and suppose it had any intention of finding the target. Paraptoomata, on the other hand, has maybe nicked the edge of that target, or found purchase in the outermost rings. At any rate, the effort is clear in the trajectory. It may not be spot on, but there’s evidence of having tried.
So, look at what is implied here in what Jesus says. What you have against somebody is more likely to be a matter in which they have slipped up. If we had the sense to confront them on the matter, we would hear something to the effect of, “I didn’t mean to do that,” or, “you misunderstood what I said.” In this case, they would be speaking most honestly. The affront was unintentional, not a conscious assault on you. Yet, you are consciously assaulting them by this holding of a grudge. What they did in spite of having no desire to do so, you are now doing because of your desire to do so. Who, then, is the guiltier party? Further, we fail to abide in that love to which we are commanded. Love, we are taught, is not provoked and doesn’t keep accounts as to wrongs suffered (1Co 13:5). Love bears with and believes all things, hopes all things and endures all things (1Co 13:7). The summation of that would be that love assumes the best in every action, not the worst.
Love would look upon the lapse in a brother and start with the assumption that it was unintentional. Love mixed with honesty would require us to look at that situation and realize that, “there but for the grace of God go I.” I am every bit as capable of making that same mistake as the one who has offended me. Indeed, I am likely far more capable! Well, then, the instruction is clear: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If I had screwed up in innocence, I should hardly wish to be charged with intentional evil over the matter! If something I spoke in innocence is received by you with the dark shadings of your own thoughts, I would not wish to be accused of purposefully seeking to upset you. So, then, why should I respond with vitriol if I feel slighted by your innocent comment? Why should I demand apologies and reparations from you for the very thing I shall doubtless be doing to somebody else within the hour? No! Far better to forgive these things. Far better to recognize them as the weightless, meaningless matters they are and let them go.
Why, then, do we find it so often so hard to forgive? In part, I think it may be because we still have this horribly over inflated sense of self. It’s a sin, I tell you! What they’ve done to me is a sin! The way that place ripped me off is sinful! Well, maybe so, but not as regards you. As for you, it is merely offensive. But, we are expected to forgive such offense – against anyone, if we would expect our own failings to be forgiven by God and if we would have any reason to suppose He wants to listen to us.
Forgiveness of sins, Zhodiates notes, is neither expected of us, nor is it our prerogative. God alone can forgive sins, because sins are against Him alone. Our task, our daily, every moment task, is to forgive such debts and offenses as might actually be on our accounts. What has been said to us or about us, what wrong has been done to us, or at least we perceive it as such: these are matters between mortals, and our clear instruction is to forgive as we would wish to be forgiven. If there is a sin component involved, that is against God and forgiveness is His call, not yours. You can hold that grudge however long you like, but if He has forgiven the sin, the sin is forgiven. Done.
That said, I believe there is a certain delegated authority set in the hands of those working in God’s purpose. He may indeed invest His servants not with the power to forgive directly, but with the mission of declaring that forgiveness to those whom God has forgiven. Again, though, the power is not with the servant but with the Master. As with prayer, so with forgiveness.
This really is the main point that MUST be taken away from the passages I have been soaking in here. The power lies with God, not His servants. How much the disciples understood this as Jesus delivered the message I don’t know. I really do think they probably had that moment of thinking, “ooh, the power!” when told that their belief, let alone their prayer, could achieve this sort of stuff. But, therein lies the reason for the cautions and corrections. I am willing to suppose that Jesus, as He spoke these things, spoke them with a tone and a visage that made clear that this wasn’t intended to provoke a hunger for power, but to serve as a caution as to the power that was there, and to limit any urge to try and play games with faith and prayer. It’s not about ginning up signs and wonders. It’s about pursuing God’s purpose. Anything else is vanity and wind. If the disciples didn’t get it at the time, rest assured, they figured it out in short order. May we do likewise!
