In Response to Dr. Richard Carrier

Among the prominent “internet infidels” is Dr. Richard Carrier who recently obtained his PhD in Ancient History from the prestigious Columbia University. I was privileged to meet Dr. Carrier a year ago (mid-March 2009) just before his debate with Dr. William Lane Craig on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus at my undergraduate alma mater. I had read a lot of Dr. Carrier’s work especially on the internet and he’s certainly a prolific writer, at least on the internet. His site describes Dr. Carrier as “a world-renowned author and speaker”. Now, from my personal interaction with Dr. Carrier, he’s a very winsome and genial guy. I really enjoyed both times of interaction—first at a brief presentation on some of his work with some focus on the question of the historical Jesus and then more informally at Lunch. Again, I’ll say it: he’s personally a nice guy, though his writing and speaking may not indicate that. I start in this way because I want to emphasize that my critique hereafter is not a personal attack to Dr. Carrier and indeed what I write here, I’d say to his face as well as I have tagged him to this note as well. So I don’t want to give the impression that this is a cowardly enterprise.

I recently listened to a lecture by Dr. Carrier on what seemed to be an argument for the non-existence of Jesus. I have to say that when I discussed with Dr. Carrier in March 2009, he seemed to take an agnostic position i.e. suggesting the minimal requirement for asserting that Jesus was a historical figure and the minimal historical case against Jesus historicity rather than taking a definite side on the issue. That seemed like a pleasant stand to me given the fact that I had the impression that he was favoring a non-historical Jesus. However, in this lecture given at Missouri State, he presents what seems to be a clearly non-historical position i.e. Jesus didn’t exist. I listened to the lecture—several times at that—and was shocked at some of the nonsense (pardon my candor) presented therein. I must add the caveat that it is my understanding that this lecture was given in 2008 and so maybe since then Dr. Carrier has changed his mind and thus my critique, while it would still apply to the lecture, may not apply to him directly. There is a lot to respond to. However, my objective is not a thorough critique but a substantially convicting one to question Dr. Carrier’s objectivity in studying the historical Jesus issue. Now, to my critique…

[I highly recommend watching the lecture (40 minutes lecture and about 15 minutes Q and A), at least the first part, before reading my full response. The first part is located here (and you can get the link to the other 5 parts): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOGebAEOU2g&feature=PlayList&p=173771A2BA92F59D&index=0 ]

It is curious that a credentialed historian would begin a lecture on “Did Jesus Exist” by admitting that the lecture will be presented “tongue in cheek”. One has to wonder why a straight forward historical assessment would not suffice for a historian; why won’t Dr. Carrier be answering that question in his lecture? This is the typical attitude that is present in the prophets of The New Atheism—using emotional rhetoric on critical intellectual issues. Nevertheless, Dr. Carrier begins by “quoting an ancient document” on the death of Jesus. Dr. Carrier quotes the following:

“On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover

All that is sufficient for Dr. Carrier is that in comparison to the New Testament data, this account of Jesus’ life doesn’t quite agree. This is a fascinating conclusion because both documents agree that Jesus was [1] “hanged” and [2] more relevant for the rest of Carrier’s lecture that Jesus was a historical person. So here is the irony: Dr. Carrier uses a document to prove inconsistent accounts of Jesus’ life, yet the document admits that Jesus lived. You have to wonder about such shoddy “scholarly” work. Like the arguments of The New Atheism, Dr. Carrier cuts the branch on which he sits.

If this wasn’t bad enough, you have to wonder about Dr. Carrier’s comprehension abilities. He says that the account says Jesus was “stoned not crucified”. What? Twice (at the beginning of the quote and at the end) in that document, it clearly says that Jesus was “hanged”—a term equivalent to “crucifixion” according to Paul in the New Testament e.g. Galatians 3: 13. What could have made Dr. Carrier miss these two obvious declarations and instead affirm the false claim that the Talmud says that Jesus was stoned? I was reminded of the comment by Dr. Craig during their debate that “before Richard reads between the lines, he should learn to read the lines”. This is doubly troubling because this is from a written lecture. You can imagine a slip of thought in an extemporaneous statement, but Dr. Carrier read this from a prior write-up. What kind of sloppy study was put into the preparation? By the way, all this is less than a minute into the lecture.

Now, you’d think this kind of sloppiness is a onetime occurrence. But it is more characteristic than you would imagine in that lecture. Additionally, he points out that Jesus was killed by the Jews according to the Talmud while according to the New Testament, he is killed by the Romans. What??? Has he read the Book of Acts? (Interestingly, I’m going through the Book of Acts in a study with some Christian brothers and sisters so that statement shocked me sure enough). Obviously, he has because he spends the bulk of the lecture on the Book of Acts. But did he miss the encounter between Peter and the Jewish leaders where we read:

“Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: "Rulers and elders of the people! If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed.”—Acts 4: 8-10

Notice that according to the New Testament, Peter blames who for Jesus’ death? Not the Romans, but the “rulers and elders of the people”. Are Dr. Carrier and I reading the same New Testament documents? This is still within the first minute of the “lecture”—if we can dignify it thus. Ironically, later on in the lecture Carrier quotes this passage of Acts and acknowledges that Peter does acknowledge that the Jewish leaders killed Jesus. This historical mismatch is still reminiscent of the contradiction that is abundant in the literature of the New Atheists. And Carrier is willfully ignorant of the contradictory stance he puts forth.

Even earlier in the Book of Acts, Peter is speaking to Jews in Jerusalem immediately after Pentecost and says to their face: “This man [Jesus] was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross”—Acts 2: 23. But Dr. Carrier conveniently misses these statements in the New Testament.

Then Dr. Carrier says that this passage from the Talmud is the “best” source for Jesus outside the New Testament. Hmmmmm….This is curious coming from a credentialed Historian, since he makes no mention of Tacitus or Suetonius who make mention of Jesus and the origin of Christianity as a Jewish sect from some historical figure and more importantly predate the Talmud. Tacitus even tells us Jesus suffered the “extreme penalty” (crucifixion) under Pontus Pilate. But Dr. Carrier conveniently is silent on this. Still on this quote, Dr. Carrier tells us this is from a document that is “centuries later” from the supposed time of Jesus. So what about the New Testament documents? Even by his own admission, though not in this lecture, the New Testament documents are much earlier, written just decades from the time of Jesus. What he fails to tell you and me is why the Talmud should carry any more historical weight than the New Testament. Would anyone trust me writing centuries after the events surrounding George Washington’s life more than those who wrote a few decades after him?

If you thought that this is a mockery of scholarship, as the saying goes “you aint seen nothing yet”. I recall reading Dr. Richard Dawkin’s bestseller “The God Delusion” and being baffled that he dispenses with Aquinas’ arguments for God’s existence in barely three pages, I thought that was a laugh until I listened to Dr. Carrier dispel of the Epistles of the New Testament’s record of the historical Jesus in a few sentences. Did Dr. Carrier miss the memo that according to arguably the earliest Epistle of Paul, Galatians 4: 4 tells us Jesus was born “under the law” from a Jewish woman? Oh, maybe he could have read in Romans 1: 3 that Jesus “as to his human nature was a descendant of David”. Certainly, if he ignored the memo from Paul, he may have considered that from the Epistle to the Hebrews 5: 7 the author of Hebrews says “During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission”. Did he miss all these numerous historical details of Jesus’ life from the Epistles? But it is much easier to dispel of such issues in a few sentences. Magic as left Harry Potter and visited Springfield, Missouri. We are still within the first three minutes of the lecture.

As he proceeds, he makes a curious point against the supposed lack of a historical detail from the Epistles on Jesus—no details of Jesus’ physique. This is supposed to count against the historical Jesus. That’s funny since even the Gospels which are supposed to portray the historical Jesus—namely his parables, his travels, his family, his friends e.t.c.—don’t seem concerned about Jesus’ physique either. I suppose this escapes Carrier’s thought but maybe the historian should conclude simply that the first Christians were not concerned about Jesus’ physical look rather than claim that the absence of any such physical details imply that there was no one for even the “invented” Jesus doesn’t have any physical detail.

Having moved to the Gospels, this historian fails to engage with them but equates them or satirically parallels them with those of pagan mythology ignoring the fact that there is a lot of historically significant detail in the Gospel stories—historical personages and details are present. Pontus Pilate was really the Roman official at the time; both Annas and Caiaphas were the high priests of the time (archeologists have now found Caiaphas tomb); John the Baptist was a notable prophet of the time; Pharesees were real at the time; Sadducees were there then and their beliefs were generally accurately represented. So we have all these historical people in the midst of the Jesus story and to our general estimates, they concur with historical details elsewhere but let’s just throw Jesus out. Occam’s razor said not to postulate more entities than is needed; Richard’s razor selectively eliminates entities from history.

You would also at least think that a historian of the caliber of Dr. Carrier will not make the mistake of popular culture that there were only “three wise men” at the birth of Jesus for the text doesn’t say so but indeed he does. This makes you wonder whether it is from popular culture or from scholarship that Dr. Carrier gets his information. Carrier then moves on to talk about the darkness that happened at Jesus’ death for three hours which no one else in history reports. Really? Because one Christian writer responds to a non-Christian historian, Thallus, who argues that the darkness at Jesus’ death was due to an eclipse rather than supernatural like the Christians claimed. So at least we know of one historian who seems to be aware of the darkness at Jesus’ death. Now, I am gracious, so I am willing to admit that Carrier is aware of all these but he doesn’t mention them in his talk. This is very important, because Carrier’s whole central argument against the historicity of Jesus is precisely that: since we don’t get the information about the details of Jesus’ life from the Epistles or other historical sources, then Jesus didn’t exist. The argument cuts both ways because I can say that since Carrier doesn’t tell us he knows about Thallus or Galatians or Romans or Hebrews e.t.c. then he must not know them. Carrier’s underlying error then is that he fails to realize that the absence of evidence isn’t the evidence of absence.

So far I have only discussed the first 7 minutes of the lecture and my discussion has only been cursory. Carrier does something interesting hereafter, though. He actually begins to quote some of the New Testament data. He mentions the Gospel of Mark (although he doesn’t present us with the Chapter and verses e.t.c.). Of course then it is couched in nonsense as well so that doesn’t get us anywhere. He then proceeds to quote Matthew’s version verbatim, though still without citation. He then takes issue with the difference between Matthew and Mark’s account of the person who delivers the message to the women. Mark calls him “a young man” and Matthew calls him “an angel” and, in this, Carrier sees a problem.

I guess I shouldn’t blame him for seeing a problem as a 21st century American; in fact, it may not be too bad to see a problem with it as a historian but does Carrier have any Biblical studies education from the Jewish culture? Because it doesn’t take a rocket scientist (I certainly am not one) to notice that for example in the incident of Abraham’s visitation by “three men” in Genesis 18 and 19, these three persons are called men in Genesis 18: 2 and 16 in one breath and in the next breath, after identifying one of the men as “the LORD”, the other two are referred to as “two angels” in Genesis 19: 1. This is of course nonsense to Carrier but certainly not to the Jewish mindset. They frequently described heavenly or spiritual figures like angels as “men”. But I guess we can chalk up Carriers error to Biblical ignorance.

But I wonder what Carrier would think if the accounts between Mark and Matthew were exactly paralleled. Frankly, I don’t know. But I do know that elsewhere he argues that with the striking parallels between Luke and the Jewish historian Josephus, either Luke borrowed from Josephus or vice versa. So I wonder what congruent accounts would show, anyway? Matthew stole the info from Mark. Ah, so it seems that whatever explanation is insufficient.

But you seriously have to wonder where Dr. Carrier gets his information from. He says the Book of Acts “claims [the disciples] had just spent 40 straight days in a locked room with and undead Jesus”. Please help me out here, but this is what Acts says: “After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.”—Acts 1: 3. Where does he got the information that they were in a “locked room” for 40 days with Jesus? Carrier earlier asserts that the Christians added to historical texts. Well, he’s not far off from being a Christian, then.

Even the accounts in the Gospels about Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances mention outside appearances e.g. to the disciples on the road to Emmaus—Luke 24: 13-35; He also lead them out to Bethany which is outdoors not in a “locked room”—Luke 24: 50. These are not hidden things, people; they are simply documents evident to all and it is strikingly amazing that no one calls him out on any of these issues even in the Q and A session. The massive ignorance of people on biblical issues is saddening.

At one point Carrier argues that Jesus’ supposed human family disappears after the first chapter of Acts which seems strange to him unless of course Jesus really never existed and so really didn’t have a family. What he also fails to point out is that the numerous disciples mentioned in the Gospels also largely go missing in the Book of Acts except a few like Peter, John and even James who are central to the Gospel accounts. Why doesn’t he argue that John and James are also not historical since they, according to him, vanish as well. It’s also curious that he makes a big deal about Joseph of Arimathea’s vanishing act, though he doesn’t seem puzzled by his act of appearance suddenly and all through the Gospel accounts. What seems obvious to others is that Joseph of Arimathea is relevant to the Jesus story only because he played an important role in Jesus’ burial not necessarily because he did not exist. Then he also mentions Jesus’ supposed earthly father, namely, Joseph and his early disappearance from even the Gospels. What evades his explanation is that if Joseph is an “invention”, why that invention is needed at all given almost no role in the story. If there was no real Joseph, the “father” of Jesus, and if he plays almost no role in the Jesus story, why invent him? These historical questions seem to evade the historian.

There is so much nonsense in the rest of the lecture that to respond to them would be tiring. Nevertheless, let me hit on a few things. Carrier claims that the first Christian martyr Stephen basically ends his defense before the Jewish leaders as follows “you all broke your own law and that killed my imaginary friend”, he says. In this, Carrier is arguing that even when Stephen is arguing that the Jewish leaders killed Jesus, he’s making the argument mystically i.e. you killed Jesus by breaking your law not really by murdering him. I kid you not, this is Carrier’s account of the story. Here’s how Acts actually records the event:

“You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— 53you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it”—Acts 7: 51-53.

Hmmm…The unanswered questions abound. The murder of Jesus, “the Righteous One”, according to Stephen is linked to those of the “prophets”. Where those merely killed mystically by breaking the law or literally? How do you betray and murder someone mystically? Of course, as we have noticed, the trend of historical interpretation is “anything goes”.

I must conclude here by adding that the Q and A was actually more interesting because even Dr. Carrier gives a more academic presentation. He even agrees that the New Testament was not formalized by Constantine in the 4th century but much earlier. He even places the dating of the New Testament documents as completed by 150-160 AD. That shatters all of popular culture's ideas of Constantine developing the New Testament books. The Q and A session portrays Carrier in his more likable and scholarly posture and should be watched by everyone interested in Carrier.

Prophet Balaam: The False Prophet

As a final treatise on an Old Testament Prophet, let’s review the life of Balaam. Balaam’s ministry is one in which we do not have much detail of, though we have enough to learn a few things from. In fact we do not have the writings of Balaam though we have both the Old and New Testaments speaking about him. There is a debate in Christian circles as to whether Balaam was actually a Prophet of God or not. I don’t want to get into that debate. However, I am persuaded that he was because the account in Numbers 22-24 shows him as communicating with the LORD and especially as the LORD speaking to him.

I have earlier mentioned how the New Testament speaks of Prophets. Peter warns against false Prophets in 2 Peter 2 and tells us that these “have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”—v. 20. Ironically, Jesus in the Olivet Discourse about His second coming speaks repeatedly about “False Prophets”. His first response to the disciples in Matthew 24 about His return was “See to it that no one misleads you”—v. 3. In v. 11, He again cautions of false prophets and repeats such caution in v. 24. Paul speaking of the end times, writes continually that there will be false prophets—1 Timothy 4: 1-4; 2 Timothy 3: 13—and to the Thessalonian church he wrote against the false prophecy that Christ had returned in 2 Thessalonians 2: 2. Caution against false prophets is the single most poignant revelation about imminence of Christ’s return both from Jesus Himself and the early Church. Peter, John and Jude use Balaam as a prime example of false prophets. Yet, like Balaam, I sense that we can fall into apostasy if we fail to be cautious of what God wants of us in ministry and now I present three points of caution that Balaam’s ministry teaches us.

Caution #1: Be Cautious of the Enemy
The story of Balaam as recorded in Numbers 22-24 is seemingly innocuous. Balaam apparently seeks God in all he does [like your typical Evangelical Christian] before the Moabites and God clearly speaks to him but Balaam failed to draw the line of interaction with the enemy of Israel and thus the enemy of God. It was the Apostle James, the half-brother of Jesus, who said “do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God?…whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God”—James 4: 4. This was Balaam’s first mistake and our first caution. Balaam failed to recognize the world for what it was in the Moabites. We as the Christian church can fail to recognize that our world is strongly anti-God. It was G.K. Chesterton, that great 21st century English journalist who died in 1936, who wrote in his day
“You are free in our time to say that God does not exist; you are free to say that He exists and is evil; you are free to say … that He would like to exist if He could. You may talk of God as a metaphor or mystification; you may water Him down with gallons of long words, or boil Him to the rags of metaphysics; and it is not merely that nobody punishes, but nobody protests. But if you speak of God as a fact, as a thing like a tiger, as a reason for changing one’s conduct, then the modern world will stop you somehow if it can. We are long past talking about whether an unbeliever should be punished for being irreverent. It is now thought irreverent to be a believer”. Balaam’s error was that he failed to realize that friendship, even in minute ways, with the world leads to irreverence for God. Caution #1: Be Cautious of the Enemy.

Caution #2: Be Cautious of the Word of God

Yet, failing to recognize the enemy isn’t all that plagued Balaam. You see, the leap to apostasy is never a leap at all but more of a gradual slide. Satan never seduces us to go all the way from the beginning. He is too crafty to do that. He begins with something small and only increases it with time. And in Balaam’s ministry, that slide began when he began to disregard the word of God. The scary thing about Balaam was that He proclaimed the Word of God yet seemed to act out of accord with it.

I see the slide brewing in the Christian world. You have churches electing and ordaining practicing homosexuals and immoral people in disregard to the warnings of the Apostle Paul; you have churches “forbidding to marry” in disregard to the New Testament; you have churches forbidding certain foods in opposition to the Word of God and you have churches denying the very Lord who bought them. We have become a people that do not listen to the Word of God. Which of us is not guilty of it? First be preach the word without heeding it and gradually slide into not even preaching it at all but the scariest passage in scripture may be when Jesus said “Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven” and you and me have said to Christ: “Lord, Lord”. Balaam’s life cautions us not to ignore the Word of God.

Caution #3: Be Cautious of the Intent of the Heart
The final caution of Balaam’s ministry is found in expositions on his life not recorded in Numbers 22-24 but elsewhere. Numbers 31: 16 reads “Behold, these caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the LORD”. The New Testament carries the thought further, indicating that Balaam’s error was in enticing the people of God to sin. You see, Balaam knew God could not curse Israel unless Israel first abandons God. So he tells the Moabites, “I can’t curse Israel because God doesn’t curse them. But if you want Israel to be cursed, go ahead and marry into Israel and they will displease God and God Himself will curse them” and so Numbers 25: 1 reads “While Israel remained at Shittim, the people began to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab”. This is the third caution to be observed—the intent of the heart

We can know the enemy of God, be in strict adherence to the Word of God outwardly, but I have to be honest with you that sometimes I see Balaam in my own heart when God is displaced from the throne and I go my own way. As I pen these words, I am pricked by the selfish intentions of my own heart and life that at times deliberately ignores God and my prayer is that you and me may be so filled with the Spirit of God that we can not only draw the enemy lines and know the Word of God but yield our very hearts and intents to Him. So as I end this series, I hope we can say a prayer beginning with the words: “Father, forgive me for I have sinned”! Be blessed as you consider these words.

Prophet Isaiah: The Humility Prophet

A Prophet that we cannot ignore as we look at lessons from the lives of the Prophets of the Old Testament by which to guide our lives is the Prophet Isaiah. The Book of Isaiah is a lengthy book that I cannot do justice to in a few words. Indeed the book has sections to it. Yet, I think it is worthwhile to select a specific passage to focus on. I have selected the 6th chapter of Isaiah verses 1-9 to elucidate three truths of experiencing God that we should be aware of.

Only a few men in history have been able to see God even in some limited sense since the Garden of Eden when Adam apparently walked with God. Thirty chapters after the burning bush experience [Exodus 3] Moses, in audacious boldness, asked to see God’s glory and God granted him His “back” but not His “face” [Exodus 33]; Gideon shivered when He saw the face of the angel of the LORD [Judges 6]; Samson’s parents were terrified by the visit of the angel of the LORD calling it “awesome” [Judges 13]; Daniel’s face became pale and troubled when he saw the vision of the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man [Daniel 7]; Stephen after his martyrdom speech see the Lord Jesus and the Father in a heavenly vision and braces himself for death [Acts 7] and John on the Island of Patmos crowns it all telling us that upon seeing the glorified Lord Jesus, he “fell at his feet as though dead” [Revelations 1: 17]. Yet there is the witness of Isaiah that I think is unique from all of these visions and glimpses of the Almighty and Isaiah takes us through three steps that an encounter with the Divine entails.

Step 1: Recognition of His Holiness.
I have to be honest with you, I don’t know what Isaiah is talking about. Is this a vision of “the Lord” or is it a literally real experience? I really don’t know. A friend of mine frequently brings this up. I tend to not imagine Seraphims as physical beings with literal wings and faces but that might be my limited judgment. And what is this talk of a Temple and “robe” of “the Lord" about? I am pretty sure this is the only place where the Seraphims appear in Scripture, both the Old and New Testaments, and we are told that they surrounded the throne of “the Lord”. What an amazing privilege? Not Isaiah but these Seraphims—to be next to the Creator and Sustainer of Life itself! What an earnest longing of my own heart—this poverty stricken heart. Do you long for that encounter?

But what are these creatures doing? In the splendor and excellence of their being, we are not told that they are smiling [as I tend to imagine angels] but rather that they are chanting…Chanting, not that God is “Holy” or that God is “Holy, Holy” but that God is “Holy, Holy, Holy”! The first step in an encounter with God [and Christ] is an inevitable recognition of His Holiness.

Step 2: Recognition of our Wretchedness
I have to place Isaiah’s encounter in the proper religio-historical context. Isaiah begins relating his encounter in chapter 6 with the words “I saw the Lord seated on a throne”. What is interesting to note is that in the first five chapters, Isaiah condemns the Israelites in a seemingly pious disregard for his audience making himself seem utterly righteous. Yet he comes before the “Holy, Holy, Holy” One and, as he would word it later, his righteousness becomes as “fitly rags”. The terrible thing about meeting a Holy God is that the evil and ugliness of your heart and my heart is laid bare before Him. Isaiah may have been righteous before his companions but before God, his only response was “Woe to me…I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips”. The only warning I can give of seeking God is that it can be terrible—terribly awesome, terribly humbling. But such humbleness is necessary for our Prophetic mission. Have you been broken by God? Have you recognized your wretchedness. Paul did and he gives us the account in Romans 7. This Pharesee who was "according to the Law, blameless" exclaimed: "Oh, wretched man that I am"...Less #2? A Recognition of our Wretchedness.

Step 3: Recognition of our Commission
A fascinating thing happens to Isaiah after His encounter with God and His response to that encounter. We are told that one of the Seraphims flies towards the broken Prophet with a burning coal, touches the Prophet's lips with that burning coal and then proclaims the Prophet cleansed by that fiery act. Lesson? The brokenness we experience upon meeting God leads to a cleansing in our hearts that we become the mouthpiece of God and there is only one question left for us to answer thereafter and it was the question Isaiah was asked: “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?”. It is the same statement left by our Lord in the now famous “Great Commission”. Once you get sucked into [and please pardon my language] an experience with the Divine, the only thing left to answer once that Divine meets with us is, “Will we Go”? Isaiah was willing to go. Am I? Are you?

Through Isaiah, we learn the spirit of humility in ministry. First we recognize the “Lo”! where we see God; that “Lo” evokes the “Woe”, when we recognize ourselves and finally, there’s the “Go” where we accept His mandate and recognize His commission. May we grow in the humility of Prophethood

Prophet Hosea: The Living Prophet

This week we consider another Prophet frequently overlooked from the Old Testament—Hosea. Admittedly, Hosea seems to be a book of Judgment that we frequently like to ignore in the midst of world of “peace” and so it might seem to have less of an appeal to us today than it had to those to whom Hosea preached. However, I think this is deeply mistaken especially when one considers the context in which Hosea lived and preached. He lived and preached during the times just before the destruction of Israel in the 8th century B.C when Israel had forgotten God. Can we, as a nation, as a Church, and as individuals relate to that today? Absolutely! Fortunately, Hosea has three things we do well to consider!

The Book of Hosea may be divided into three parts: Chapters 1-3 where Hosea is commanded by God to marry a prostitute; Chapters 4-13 where there is a repeated message of the cycle of sin, discipline and restoration and Chapter 14 that summarizes and emphasizes that last point—restoration. I consider these three features in that order and reproduce why I think Hosea may rightly be called the Living Prophet for he lived out his message.

Feature #1: Living the Message
The opening verses of this Book are almost repugnant as God commands Hosea to take a harlot for a wife. Scholars debate as to whether Hosea writes in retrospect i.e. God told him to marry Gomer and then she turned out to be a harlot or in prospect i.e. God told him to marry the local prostitute. I am not going to enter that debate but I sense that the latter is true for it was important for Hosea to be in tune entirely to the message he was going to bring to Israel. You see, Israel had deserted the God who delivered them—the God whom they covenant with as a wife to her husband—and were now playing the harlot by worshipping other “so called” gods and trampling on the commandments of God.

Someone has rightly said “you will never lighten any burden, unless you feel the burden in your own soul”. Think about those words for a moment! It was important for Hosea to feel the message he was going to bring forth to the people of God—that a Holy and Faithful God has been the recipient of the effects of harlotry of a faithless people. Have you been mistreated by someone you love? Please permit my candor: I was almost utterly broken when my girlfriend told me that no one has yelled at her the way I did once when I was very upset. Yet, if I was that broken, how broken do you think she was at the time? And what’s more? I can’t take back that act. And what the God of the Universe communicates to His messenger is “I, a Holy and Sovereign God, need you to feel a little bit of the burden of Israel’s apostasy”.

But let me bring it home lest we live in the illusion of the distance geographically and historically between us and Hosea. Hosea wrote and preached, not to an unbelieving people but to a believing people, a chosen people, a covenanted people. You and me have covenanted with the Holy God and do we think that He is not utterly distraught by our unfaithfulness to Him either when we sin ignoring His covenant or else when we replace Him as sovereign in our lives? You know what Hosea realized? He realized that as we depart from God whether as a nation, or as a Church or as individuals, we can only feel the heart of God in the names of the children of Hosea—“Jezreel” meaning “punishment”; “Lo-ruhamah” meaning “no more love” and “Lo-Ammi” meaning “not my people”? It was important that the message of unfaithfulness to God be passed through Hosea to Israel by Hosea living out the Message. Have you been burdened by the message of unfaithfulness?

Feature #2: Living in Repentance
Yet, the message of Hosea and the message from God is not merely one of judgment is it? Because in the end Hosea takes back his wife of harlotry as God commanded “Go again, love a woman who is loved by her husband, yet an adulteress, even as the LORD loves the sons of Israel”—Hosea 3: 1. Isn’t that the magnificence of God’s message? It isn’t about *our* faithfulness but about His love. Hosea had to buy back his wife. What a tremendous illustration of the Cross of Jesus!!! Jesus buys us back in His blood to dwell with Him but there is a requirement, namely “You shall stay with me for many days. You shall not play the harlot, nor shall you have a man; so I will also be toward you”—Hosea 3: 3. We must live in constant repentance from our sin. I do not speak about the repentance that we express upon conversion but the repentance we need to express subsequent to it. We don’t become immune from sin upon conversely and need to, like the Apostle John indicates “confess our sins” to Him. Do you live in repentance? I know I struggle with it but such is inevitable when abiding with a Holy and Faithful God. Gomer had to live in repentance

Feature #3: Living in Hope of the Promise
We are not left without hope, though. Hosea’s message to Israel had a recurring theme of unfaithfulness, repentance and restoration. I find this to be true in my walk [and I suspect in yours too]. But the message is not only about now. It also includes the future hope of the resurrection when “we shall see him as He is for we will be like Him”—1 John 3: 2. If that thought doesn’t encourage you through the harlotry we constantly fall into, I do not know what will but I sure hope it does. Hosea in Chapter 14 speaks of the ultimate restoration of Israel—a blessed hope in my walk of the ultimate restoration of this corrupt frame when, as Paul says, we shall be raised incorruptible.

Hosea is a living prophet that speaks to us today in living truly the message of grace, living in repentance and living in the hope of the promised restoration. Be blessed as you do so!

Prophet Elijah: The Powerful Prophet

This week, we look at a familiar Prophet—the Prophet Elijah. Elijah’s life and ministry is not given to us specifically from his own writings as that of Jonah or Habakkuk or Nehemiah. We derive our information about this notable Old Testament character in the Books of Kings and Chronicles. I have chosen to look at Elijah as the Powerful prophet. I derive this not merely from the account of his life / ministry given to us in the Old Testament but additionally from the New Testament commentary of James, the half-brother of Jesus, on Elijah. James tells us “The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much” and he then proceeds to make a reference to Elijah as a prime example of powerful prayer—James 5: 16, 17. Let us turn now to three principles that guaranteed Elijah’s Prophetic ministry to be powerful as we endeavor to build a Powerful Ministry.

Principle #1: Be in Touch with the Word of God.

The first thing we are told of Elijah is that he speaks to a wicked king [king Ahab] and prophesies of a few years of drought. The next thing we are told is “So he went and did according to the word of the LORD”—1Kings 17:1-5. Here we find the first principle that guaranteed power in Elijah’s ministry—he was in touch with the Word of God.

We too need to be in touch with the Word of God. We, unlike Elijah, may not have the LORD audibly speak to us yet, as Peter indicates, “we have a more sure word of prophecy and do well to pay attention to it”—2 Peter 1: 19. What is interesting is the context in which these words were written. Peter, in the preceding verses (16-18) speaks of the experience at the Mount of Transfiguration recorded in Matthew 17—a glorious experience I would give a lifetime to witness. Yet, Peter tells us that such experience is only secondary to the words of the Prophets—the Holy Scriptures. And what Peter tells us is that our experiences and emotions are only secondary to the Word of God. Yet, I see many who put their personal feelings and experience over and above the words of Scripture but Elijah was powerful in ministry because he follows that fundamental principle—he was in touch with the Word of God.

There is a second aspect to the Word of God. The Scriptures are the written Word of God. But John tells us in John 1 that Jesus is the Word made flesh—Jesus is the living Word of God. To be powerful in ministry, we need to be in touch with the *written* Word as well as the *living* Word of God by study of the Bible and communion with Jesus in prayer. I leave you with that question: Do you know the Scriptures? Do you know the Lord Jesus Christ? We cannot have a powerful ministry without these components.

Principle #2: Be in Touch with the World around.

Not only was Elijah in touch with the Word of God, secondly he was in touch with the world around him. First, he was aware of a potential ministry to a widow and her son and didn’t merely bask in the warmth of being in communion with God. We, as Christians, need to be ready to serve a needy world. Additionally and more importantly, Elijah was also aware of a spiritual ministry to the people of Israel. In his bid to share that ministry, he was halted by a fellow prophet (Obadiah) as given to us in 1 Kings 18: 1-19. Some of the most worrisome obstacles in ministry come from within the Christian camp and you and I have to ensure that we are not obstacles to God’s ministry in other Christians and yet if we have obstacles within the Faith, we need to still stick to being in touch with God’s ministry to the world.

Finally, in the encounter with the false prophets of Baal, while it may seem that Elijah is arrogant in his defense of the true God, in actuality, his focus is entirely on the spiritual need of Israel and just before calling on God to barbeque the altar, he makes an awesome prayer “O LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that You are God in Israel…Answer me, O LORD, answer me, that this people may know that You, O LORD, answer me, that this people may know that You, O LORD, are God, and that You have turned their heart back again”—1 Kings 18: 36, 37. His whole ministry was not about himself but about bringing the hearts of the people of Israel back to God. Do you and I have a passion for the hearts of the world to bring them back to the LORD? Elijah’s ministry tells us that first, we need to be in touch with the Word of God and secondly, we need to be in touch with world around to bring them back to God? Do you feel that burden? If you do, you are en route to a powerful ministry.

Principle #3: Be out of touch with your Comfort

There is one final principle in the life of Elijah that we should consider. We know that he was intent on following the Word of God and he was burdened by the need of the people to return to God. But finally, he was willing to do this at any length by renouncing his own comfort. 1 Kings 18: 3, 4 read that God tells Elijah to “Go away from here and turn eastward, and hide yourself by the brook Cherith, which is east of the Jordan. It shall be that you will drink of the brook, and I have commanded the ravens to provide for you there”. Can you imagine that Elijah had to [1] hide [2] drink from a brook and [3] be fed by ravens? How uncomfortable is that? And yet Elijah was willing to be uncomfortable for God’s ministry.

In our modern day ideal for ministry, we attempt to live the American Dream and Elijah, in his powerful ministry knew no such comfort; Paul, knew no such comfort; Jonah, knew no such comfort; Habakkuk knew no such comfort and my only conclusion is that we are to expect no such comfort. And I, in my own personal desire have to remind myself not to get caught up in these needs but remember to be in touch with the Word of God; in touch with the world around and out of out with my own comforts. Ironically, the regions of the world with the greatest Church growth are the regions that keep these three principles in mind. My prayer is that the ministry of God’s Church worldwide and especially here in this country would adhere to these principles. Will you? Be blessed as you do so!

Prophet Nehemiah: The Ministry Building Prophet

This week we look at another Prophet seldom mentioned in Christian circles yet fundamentally important to the Christian Ministry—Nehemiah. The life of Nehemiah is found disclosed to us in the Book of Nehemiah. I must begin by saying that I cannot do justice to the Book in this brief piece and everyone owes it to himself/herself to read the details themselves of Nehemiah’s own calling . I call Nehemiah a Prophet though that was not his formal vocation. We are told in the last words of the first chapter of his book he was the king’s cupbearer. There is a lesson to be learned from this: we don’t have to be formal Pastors to build a ministry—Nehemiah certainly wasn’t. But besides this, there are three things to learn from Nehemiah’s ministry in building, in his case, the wall of Jerusalem and I turn to those now:

#1: Be aware of Godly Intervention

The first thing to learn of Nehemiah for anyone being a part of building a ministry is to be cognizant of God’s intervention. Nehemiah received the news of the state of Jerusalem from his brother Hanani and his first response is given to us in 1: 4: “When I heard these words, I sat down and wept and mourned for days; and I was fasting and praying before the God of heaven”. Nehemiah’s first response to adversity was a cognizance of the Sovereignty of God and his dependence on that. Isn’t it amazing that someone who worked in the palace of the king didn’t misplace his source of dependence? It is easy to say this and also trite to say it but it is fundamental to the success of any ministry in building to recognize its dependence on God. The first lesson for building a ministry from Nehemiah was to be aware of God’s intervention.

#2: Beware of External Opposition

Many recognize the need for dependence on God for ministry building but some forget the second factor in Nehemiah’s life—external opposition. Someone has rightly said “Wherever you find a man who would stand up for God to build, you can be sure that there will be another who would stand up against God to destroy” and Nehemiah’s experience was no different. Nehemiah 2: 10 tells us “When Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official heard about it, it was very displeasing to them that someone had come to seek the welfare of the sons of Israel”. So there was external opposition to the work of God

But that is not all. We read on further that two things will be consistent with the opposition [1]it will increase in number and [2] it will increase in fervor. In v. 10 we only read of the displeasure of the opposition of two groups—the Horonite and the Ammonite. In Nehemiah 2: 19, a short while later, we read of the inclusion of a third group—the Arab—and a more offensive opposition in mocking and despising: “But when Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official, and Geshem the Arab heard it, they mocked us and despised us”. 4: 1 reads “Sanballat …became furious and very angry and mocked the Jews”. In 4: 7 we read of the inclusion of “the Ashdodites” and this continues through the book.

You can be sure that there will be opposition increasing towards the growth of Christianity in our land. Before it was solely a displeasure with it and we removed it from our classrooms. Now, we are being forced to remove it from our churches when Evangelical ministers are being sued and forced to marry homosexuals. The opposition is not only going to increase in number but in fervor and the same is true for you if you are building a ministry.

But Nehemiah had a two-fold response to this opposition that we can learn from as Nehemiah 4: 9 tells us: “But we prayed to our God, and because of them we set up a guard against them day and night”. He had both a vertical and a horizontal response. First, he fell back to his previous recognition and prayed to God—this was a vertical response. But he didn’t leave it at that. He responded horizontally by addressing the threat. It is important not only to call on God but to also take a stand against the threat—Beware of External Opposition.

#3: Beware of Internal Opposition

Yet if external opposition doesn’t destroy a ministry, you can be sure that internal opposition will surface. In Nehemiah 6: 5-13, we read of the story concocted by the opposition by hiring someone on the inside to make a false warning about the building project to discourage the builders and Nehemiah himself. Yet, Nehemiah was not swayed from the course. We read a similar thing in the ministry of Paul. Paul launches into a tirade of the dangers of ministry in 2 Corinthians 11:26 as follows : “I have been on frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, dangers from robbers, dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the Gentiles, dangers in the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea” and then he ends “dangers among false brethren” as if that was the most heart breaking of all. The most devastating opposition to any ministry comes, not from without, but from within—internal opposition—and we need to beware of it.

In the end, Nehemiah responds to this opposition as he always had, by seeking God. The best idea I can leave concerning internal opposition is to be aware of God and His Word and any ministry that ignores this is bound to be victimized by the internal scheming that will surface sometime sooner or later. Churches have split over the type of music to play—contemporary or traditional; over times of worship—9am or 11am; over the dress code of the Pastor—casual or formal and over the color of the pew seats none of which is prescribed in the Word of God and forgetting that the early Church, by our standards, played neither contemporary nor traditional music, worshiped at all times, dressed neither casually nor formally and had no pews in their home churches. Yet the Word of God is being ignored on godly sexuality and conduct, biblical doctrine and practice and biblical disciplines. We ought to be aware of internal opposition ignoring the former type by addressing the latter type.

In concluding, Nehemiah tells us to [1] be always aware of God’s role in building our ministry, [2] beware of external opposition in destroying the ministry and [3] beware of internal opposition in dividing the ministry. In dealing with these oppositions, we must have both a vertical response in dependence on God and an horizontal response in dealing squarely with the threat. Be blessed as you build your ministry in the wisdom of Nehemiah.

Prophet Habakkuk: The Social Prophet

Last time we looked at Jonah as the Missionary Prophet. This week, we look at Habakkuk, another “Minor Prophet” with a definitively major message. Habakkuk is a Book with just three chapters and again, like Jonah, could easily be read in one sitting. It is often said that the New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed. When the Lord Jesus Christ was resurrected and met with the two on the road to Emmaus, we are told that He explained Scripture to them speaking of Himself. Peter, shortly after Pentecost said “[i]ndeed, all the prophets from Samuel on, as many as have spoken, have foretold these days”—Acts 3: 24. Habakkuk was one of those Prophets that concealed Christ in His Prophetic Ministry.

While there is no question that Jesus had a primarily salvific (about salvation) message to His audience, which includes you and me, it is also quite clear that Jesus had a socio-ethical message as well. You can see it in the Sermon on the Mount where he speaks of divorce, murder, the breaking of oaths and adultery amongst other things. Jesus tells us to “turn the cheek” when slapped—a social message; tells us to rejoice when we are persecuted—another social message; and in His Olivet Discourse, He points out that we should take care of others in prison. In the life and ministry of Habakkuk, the social message of Jesus as revealed in the New Testament was concealed. In Habakkuk, I see three cries that make him a Social Prophet and I turn to those cries now.

#1: Cries of Violence.

Habakkuk begins with the words: ‘How long, O LORD, will I call for help, And You will not hear? I cry out to You, "Violence!"Yet You do not save’. The cry of Habakkuk is one that should ring true in the life of every Christian (and believer in God in general) as it did in the life of Jesus. When Jesus saw the mis-shepherding by the Jewish leaders in His day, He cried out loudly cleansing the temple at one time and calling the Pharisees “brood of vipers” at another. The fact of the matter is that the believer cannot remain in silence, but must cry out “Violence”.

The first thing Habakkuk tells you and me is that we need to be troubled by the violence prevalent in our world and I hope we Christians don’t think it only exists in the outside world but even so in the Church as well. To be aware of the violence, for example in the Middle East or the continent of my birth—Africa—and not be moved by it, is quite unchristian. And lest we think that violence is a thing of miles away and across the oceans, our streets are littered with “home-grown” rapists , pedophiles and murderers, some of them who are themselves “victims of circumstance”. So troubling was such violence to Habakkuk that he wrestled with God about it. Imagine the audacious boldness to which the Prophet approaches God—Will you not hear? Will you not save? And what Jesus tells you and me is that we need to be burdened by the marring of God’s image in man. We need to cry out “Violence”! The question I leave with you, then, is “Do you cry out against violence when you see it”?

#2: Cries of Injustice.

First Habakkuk cried out against violence. Then there was a second cry in Habakkuk’s life. It is similar to the social cry of violence. We read Habakkuk saying in verse 3 “Why do You make me see iniquity [“injustice”—NIV], And cause me to look on wickedness?” Psalm 89: 14 reads “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your [God] throne”. You and I can understand Habakkuk’s predicament, can’t we? If indeed God’s throne is founded on righteousness and justice, why does injustice prevail over justice? Further, the Prophet is very perceptive. He says in v. 12 “Are You not from everlasting”. Do you know what the question is implying? If you are God and claim that Justice is the foundation of your throne and are eternal, why in the world can’t you get rid of this injustice? Or maybe it is because you really aren’t an everlasting God, isn’t it? Habakkuk is calling into question the very nature of God because of the nature of the world?

I see a lot of non-Christians making this same cry against injustice. Yet, I wonder if we Christians care for the injustice in our street, in our homes and in our hearts? As a Teaching Assistant, I struggle deeply with this question. There are certain students that one likes and others that are openly annoying and rude. Isn’t there a temptation to be unjust in grading legitimately? And if that application seems trivial to you, who is fighting for the “rights” of the homeless? A friend of mine started a ministry to the homeless that I was privileged to be a part of. It is deeply disturbing. Some of them have great minds. It’s one thing to be, like me, a foreigner; it’s another to be a “foreigner” of sorts in your own “home”. Who is fighting for the “rights” of the African Americans? If there is anything I appreciate from the last elections, I hope that we African Americans can rise to excellence with the prospect and model of the President-Elect. The days of hopelessness are gone. But there is still quite a wealth of injustice on the African American. What Jesus calls me and you to do is to take up the fight for the poor and unprivileged in the midst of injustice. Cry #2 is a cry against injustice.

#3: Cries of Trust.

Finally, I like the way Habakkuk handles his cries. First, He takes it to the LORD, Himself. That is rare, yet very commendable. Secondly, He listens to the LORD’s answer. “Violence”, by definition, means “to violate”. But how can there be violation unless there is initially an objective design or purpose of the violated? How can there be injustice without a pre-cognition of the right of justice? You cannot violate a non-existent law; I cannot violate or abuse the instruction for microwave use if there are no such objective instructions. You see, the disbeliever in God cannot legitimately cry out “violence” because according to him/her, there is no objective design or purpose—there is no “instructions manual” for life so what is there to violate? But you and I have the glorious privilege of knowing that there is an instructions manual for life. Such is found in the Holy Scriptures for man, created in the image of God, is designed for that God. In the words of St. Augustine, “You have made us for Thyself, and we are restless until we find our rest in Thee”.

I was recently asked about the solution to the problem in the Middle East between Jews and Muslims. I presented the message of the Cross as I am deeply convinced that’s the solution. Yet, my questioner discounted it for it was “religious talk”. However, this “religious talk” is sought by secular institutions for even the U.N. called on Dr. Ravi Zacharias, an evangelist, to address it and proffer solutions and wasn’t it Chancellor Konrad Adenauer of Cologne, West Germany on the heels of Hitler’s leveling of that nation who said to evangelist Billy Graham, "Outside the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, I can see no hope for mankind". In those words, I believe there is awesome truth. So, Habakkuk was right in crying out “violence” and we all, believer or not, have that essential God given instinct of noticing violence. But the Christian can point us socially to the One who gives rest, the one who said “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS”. In a world of moral, socio-political, and economical crumbling there is rest from violence and injustice in Christ! In Habakkuk’s words, “I have heard of Your fame; I stand in awe of your deeds, O LORD. Renew them in our day, in our time make them known; in wrath remember mercy”—3: 2. He ends with a cry of trust. May we be a people of trust in our ministry as social Prophets!

Prophet Jonah: The Missionary Prophet

Jonah is one of those Books of Scripture that are a delight to read for their brevity yet demand a lot for study. The Book can easily be read in one sitting of ten minutes. We are not told much about the life of Jonah but we are clearly told that he was given a message by God for the people of Nineveh—an unbelieving people, a Gentile people, a lost people. In this, you and I share something in common with Jonah—we have a mission to the unsaved; we like Jonah are a missionary prophet.

Jonah is one of those few Prophets whose prophetic prediction actually failed. He prophesied of the overthrow of Nineveh in 40 days—Jonah 3: 4. That didn’t happen in 40 days. No doubt we consider Jonah to have not been very successful in his mission despite the fact that the Ninevites repented and experienced a revival. Isn’t it ironic how human failure can be turned into spiritual success by the sovereign God? But lest we become hard on Jonah, you and I can, like him, easily make three mistakes in our Prophetic mission and I present them as positive cautions rather than negative rebuke.

Mistake #1: Passion for your Ministry

That Jonah knew he was called of God cannot be disputed. Whether you are called of God to some mission or not, I cannot determine. That is between you and God. But I do know that one thing that is essential for a successful mission is to be passionate about the ministry to which you are called. I don’t say these next words with any sense of flattery. But I do know one such man personally. Roger Charley leads the campus fellowship I am a part of and sometimes I wonder why the ministry fairs quite well in building an intimate group of College students and I have come to the conclusion that his passion flows into the lives of us college students and spills further into others. Despite ministry for more than 20 years Roger is present at the majority of activities, meets individually with members and has a honest heart. Roger is not perfect; no one is. But I am confident that his passion is one that challenges me and makes his ministry successful.

Jonah was called to an “unclean” people and he desperately and intently ran from the call. To be honest to Jonah, religio-historical considerations help one to sympathize with his seeming insecurity towards his mission. The Jews were a holy and consecrated people. The Ninevites were not. One can see how Jonah can despise the ministry to a Gentile people and lest we think there are no “Gentiles” for us today, I have to remind myself that we, as Christians, think that the sexually and morally impure, the “unclean” don’t deserve the Gospel and we intently run away from them. Yet, what God tells Jonah is what God tells you and me i.e. to drop our prejudices and develop a passion for the ministry of our call. You can have the truth of the Gospel in your heart and I can have the Gospel in my life but it becomes entirely unprofitable to the mission if the ministry is not a passion both within and without. The first mistake Jonah made was that he was not passionate about the ministry he was called to because of a religious prejudice. The mission became a drudgery—a checking off of the list of things-to-do.

Mistake #2: Passion for your Message

But there was a second mistake in Jonah’s mission which centered on his message. Jonah knew the message of God’s grace. It seemed he was disgusted about that message for he seemed to not want God’s grace but rather God’s wrath to prevail over a repentant Nineveh. Jonah 3 ends by telling us God relented from overthrowing Nineveh and Jonah 4: 1 tells us this “greatly displeased” Jonah such that he prays to God saying “Please LORD, was not this what I said while I was still in my own country? Therefore in order to forestall this I fled to Tarshish, for I knew that You are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, and one who relents concerning calamity”—Jonah 4: 2. What audacity!!! Jonah knew of God’s grace and lovingkindness and tried to hide that from the Ninevites. So willing was he to do this that he preferred death to God’s grace upon an “unclean” people—v. 3. It required a hat-trick of days in the fish’s belly to be reminded of God’s grace to even him for Jonah to change his heart and spread the message. It was in the belly of the fish that Jonah praised God’s lovingkindness—Jonah 2. You see, you and I can make the mistake of Jonah when we claim to know the message of grace but fail to internalize it in our mission. And when Jonah failed to internalize it, he despised the message when it was extended to the Ninevites. Why?

I believe this came as a consequence of the first mistake. When the passion for the ministry is lost, a corresponding loss of passion for the message is inevitable and the message you and I have for the world (Christian and not) is that the God of grace has given the world grace in the face of Jesus not to live their own way but to live God’s way. Jonah wanted the Ninevites to earn their salvation maybe by proselyting to Judaism or circumcision. We want the Hindu to stop being Indian; the Muslim to stop being Arabic; the homosexual to abandon homosexual tendencies despite the fact that we can’t even abandon our own illicit heterosexual tendencies; the gangster to abandon his vulgarity when majority of us speak only one language anyway. In all this, we forget that the call of Jesus was a call to repentance and repenting and not a call merely to conversion but one to discipleship—a constantly growing process. Jonah misplaced his message and my hope is that you and I won’t misplace our message either.

Mistake #3: Passion for your Audience

Thirdly and finally, Jonah not only lost passion for his ministry and passion for his message but he also lost passion for his audience. When the ministry becomes a drudgery and the message is misplaced, the audience of the message is bound to be reduced to a lesser value. Jonah came to be more concerned about his own comfort in the shade and vine provided by the grace of God than about the salvation of the lost Ninevites. As you and I prepare for or serve in ministry, let us not be carried away by the financial constraints or the constraints upon our time and other resources that are a cancer to the soul. Rather, let us be burdened by the persons in our audience who are, like us, created in the very image of God and reflectors of that image. People really do matter to God and Jonah forgot that. Let us not do the same.

As I conclude, I summarize that the life of Jonah as a missionary Prophet entailed the need for a passion for the ministry, the message and the audience. May the grace of Christ implement this in your life and mine as we become missionary prophets.

Lives of the Prophets: Introductions

I intend in the next few weeks to write a series of notes on the lives of the Prophets of Scripture weekly through January and February. Today, the term “Prophet” has seemingly scary connotations. It conjures up in the imagination thoughts of old bearded men living in caves with wholly devoted lives to God so as to make futuristic predictions inevitably doomed to fail. I think with such a concept of the institution of the Prophet, we lose sight of the Prophetic ministry.

There is much to learn about such a ministry especially from the Old Testament [OT]. The term “Prophet” does not necessarily mean “seer of the future” as many, and myself in the past, seem to think. In fact, the ministries of the OT Prophets seldom involved solely utterances of the future. No doubt they spoke of the future but nonetheless they were aware of the past and lived in the present. In this, I am amazed at how relevant their experiences and ministries are to is even in the 21^st century.

In the New Testament, Paul wrote a letter to the Christians at Corinth. In that letter, he dealt with a lot of things including the ministry of the Prophets. In 1^st Corinthians 14: 5, we read “Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues” then he ends the chapter by saying “[t]herefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy” in v. 39. So he tells us that to prophesy is a more desirous calling than speaking in tongues (and arguably other spiritual gift). Neither is the call to prophesy for some elite spiritual group for Paul says “my brethren (fellow Christians) desire earnestly to prophesy”—it’s for anyone called of God.

I have said that the Institution of Prophecy is not primarily about forecasting the future. But what is the definition of Prophecy? Fortunately, Paul gives us a beautiful definition of sorts in 1^st Corinthians 14: 3 when he says “one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation”. Prophecy then is for the edification, exhortation and consolation of the Body of Christ. For some of us, that means speaking; for others, that means shepherding as with Pastors; for others that means writing; for others it entails babysitting and yet for others it entails listening, hugging and sharing. I believe the lives of the OT Prophets are instructive, if not instrumental, and we do well to take heed.

I have prepared to look at eight Prophets of the Jewish Bible. These are not the eight greatest—I don’t think there’s any such thing as “greatest” Prophet(s). All were called of God, albeit to different ministries and at different times. Some of my selected Prophets wrote their own works; others penned nothing for posterity (or at least we don’t have their works). In our Christian Bible, some are considered members of the “Major Prophets”, others of the “Minor Prophets”; still others of neither. I have made no such distinctions between them here. Moreover, some of the “Minor Prophets” have some very major messages and lives for us to consider.

To close this introduction, a few acknowledgments are in order. It was the ancient historian Suetonius who penned amongst his historical works, the Lives of the Caesars series cataloging the details of such rulers. I borrow from Him the title of this series and have adapted it to suit my subject. Unlike Suetonius, however, I claim no expertise in the subject of history. Yet like him, I do have my sources. Primarily, I am a student of the English Bible and I take it as my main source especially in the New American Standard Bible [NASB] version. Secondarily, I inevitable borrow thoughts that I have gained and gleaned over the years from other Christian author, speakers, scholars, and friends that I cannot even recall so in fear of failing to acknowledge all, I would just like to say that I have deeply indebted to them all. Finally, I am most indebted to my Lord and Savior Jesus who has not only transformed my life but provided friends, Christian and otherwise, that have shaped my call. It is to this last acknowledgee, Jesus Christ, and for His Church that this is written that He may be forever praised. Amen! Happy New Year!

Men of Intergrity [Mary]

I know. The character of this work is not a “man” and seems to go at odds with the title “Men of Integrity”. Like I mentioned in the last note, I use the term “Men of Integrity” in a sensationalized way. It has resonated with me and I have been pregnant with the thought for some years now as I had said—almost four years. When I started this, I had thought that some of my female friends would be upset with the use of the term “Men” implying some chauvinism on my part. I am glad that such has not been the case [at least not openly so]. As I try to put this piece together I know I run the risk of offending someone because clearly Mary is not a man. But risking the tendency to be misunderstood, I do admit that with each passing birthday, I worry less about offending someone. I sincerely hope I am not misunderstood but sometimes I think such is inevitable.

Nevertheless, as I was thinking some more of this series, I thought it would be worthwhile to consider possibly the most famous woman of Scripture—Mary, the mother of Jesus. I was walking in contemplative thought today. Honestly, it’s a blessed exercise to walk and meditate on glorious thoughts. Seriously, how else can I get the thought of how cold it is from my fragile mind? But anyway, in the spirit of Christmas just past, I was thinking of this female character and again she taught me several lessons as revealed in Scripture.

A little side note about Mary. I am in no way Catholic by denomination. As a matter of fact, I am willing to accept the term “Protestant” to indicate that I am not Catholic. Outside of the term “Christian”, I can think of only two other labels I choose to identify myself as—Evangelical and Protestant—and lately, the former is becoming a label I am getting less fond of. I share this to emphasize that I am in no way Catholic by denomination [or as some might call the denominations in Christendom—abomination]. But I think that we Protestants sometimes lose sight of the truth that the Catholics have seemingly heightened i.e. that this Mary is a blessed figure. I think every Christian needs to read the whole chapters of Luke 1 & 2 on Christmas [I know that if blessed with a family, this is my intention]. Clearly Elizabeth *by the Holy Spirit* [and this is significant because we are sure that her words are a truth from God directly] says “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear”—Luke 1: 42. Then Mary herself presumably filled with the Holy Spirit confesses: “From now on all generations will call me blessed”—Luke 1: 48. You know the irony of all this? The phrase “all generations shall call me blessed” is similar to that used in the Old Testament as a Messianic prophecy of Jesus in earthly glory where the Psalmist tells us: “His name shall endure for ever…all nations shall call him blessed”—Psalm 72: 17. I am in no way elevating Mary to the level of our Lord but the recognition given her by the Scriptures is quite unique is my point. But why is this so? Let’s back track to back six months before this pronouncement where I learned lesson # 1.

Nine months before Christmas when the Annunciation to Mary occurred by the Angel [which is more than likely about December 25, but I will not go into why I believe this to be so here—contact me if you wish to know], the humble virgin is visited by a Divine messenger. You know the story but let me go to lesson #1 found in Mary’s response: “And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word”—Luke 1: 38. It is that same ideal that was exemplified by John the Baptist—“He must increase and I must decrease”; by the Lord of Life himself: “not my will but yours be done”. Here is found the significant lesson of a humble girl—Be it unto me, according to thy word. I suppose, then, that Surrender precedes Success.

Fast forward to twelve years later for lesson number two. Jesus is missing and alas where else would he be but in the Temple. It is highly significant to me that in the whole episode as recorded by Luke, the Evangelist, Joseph remains the dormant character. Mary seems to be the one at the forefront. The last verse of this chapter records the significance of Jesus but the penultimate verse is where I find lesson # 2: “but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart”—Luke 2: 51. Here, the sayings are the sayings of Jesus that she treasured and kept in her heart. May I suggest that we treasure up the words of the Lord in our hearts and learn in the humility of Mary that truth can be found even in the lessons from children?

G.K. Chesterton said that he learned more about God from children than from some of the great thinking philosophers. He said “the power of God’s infinity is manifested in his power to exalt in the monotonous”. What does the child say when you tickle him? “Do it again”; when you throw her up in the air and catch her? “Do it again”; what do you think God says to the sun every morning? That’s right—Do it again!

As I interact with children, I see this more and more. On New Year’s Eve while at a friend’s place, I witnessed the innocence and purity of a child; last year I obtained lessons from a 7 year old. You know we adults sometimes can be very selfish and self-absorbed. The child at the New Years Eve event wanted to play with me and joke with me and all I could think about was how I wanted to spend time with the more meaningful adults. Yet in his actions, I could see a peace and joy; a contentment and pleasure that I am not sure was evident in some of the adults present nor in myself. Can I suggest to you that you be willing to learn about God from even little children?

So there you have it. Two poignant lessons from the woman that birth the Son of God. Lesson # 1: Surrender is temporarily prior to Success. Lesson # 2: some of the lessons of God come from children and we should be willing to humble ourselves to see that. Keep these two lessons in mind as the year goes and be blessed by the mother through whom out blessed Lord chose to enter this world.