"Do You Really Love Me?" Some Reflections on the Sermon by Dr. Clarence Bass

Note: This blog post first appeared on the Central Baptist Church Blog. Check that out at:

http://www.centralbaptistchurch.com/our-blog/

This past Sunday Central Baptist had the honor of having Dr. Clarence Bass preach as a fill in for our pastor. We can not be certain how many sermons Dr. Bass has left, but it is quite obvious that he still has it and can bring the word with the best of them.

For those that did not hear it, here is a link to the audio on the website of the church.

http://www.centralbaptistchurch.com/media/sermons/

The title of the sermon was “Do You Really Love Me?” and was based on John 21:1-19. One unfortunate problem for those that will listen online to the sermon is that audio issues caused the last couple of minutes of the sermon to be cut off. That was especially problematic for this sermon because the main point and primary takeaway came during that time, but I will try to fill in  the gaps with some reflections.

John 21 is known mostly for Jesus restoring Peter following the resurrection. What is often focused on is the fact that Jesus asks Peter three times “Do you love me?” and this is supposed to mirror the three times that Peter denied Christ.

The beauty of the sermon by Dr. Bass was that he took this well known narrative and brought it a different direction than I had heard before, resulting in a takeaway that I will not soon forget.

The first thing to consider is the word “love” used by Jesus in his questions and Peter and his responses. As people may know, there are multiple words in Greek that are translated into the English word “love”. There is a subtlety in the exchange that is not easily captured in English translated.

In each of the three exchanges, Jesus asks “Do you love me?” with “love” being the Greek word agape. Peter responds that “You know that I love you” with “love” here being the Greek word philos. There is a significant difference between agape and philos that must be understood to understand the significance of this exchange.

Agape is the highest form of love, an all-encompassing love in all things. Jesus is asking Peter if Peter has all encompassing love for Jesus. “Do you agape me?”

Peter responds with philos, which is perhaps the lowest ranking form of love, the type of love you would have for a friend. Important love no doubt, but not at the level that Jesus was asking him about or, perhaps more importantly, the type of love that Jesus asks from us.

Why would Peter respond this way? Why would he respond to agape with philos? And what can we take away from that?

As Dr. Bass so eloquently put it, how could Peter not? He had just denied Jesus three times. His actions had proven that he indeed did not agape Jesus, he had just denied him in order to save himself! And who knows how many unrecorded responses there are of Peter’s responses to Jesus. How could Peter say that he had agape for Jesus when his own thoughts and actions so betrayed such an emotion?

And how true is that for us? None of us are perfect in our love for Jesus. We might be able to fake it on the surface but we know in our hearts that we betray agape when it comes to our love for Jesus. There are times that we do not agape Jesus and our thoughts and actions betray us.

But there is good news (there always is). Jesus knows this and he is filled for agape for us anyways. Even if we cannot bring ourselves to fully acknowledge and live out the agape for Jesus ourselves, Jesus is still with us and is still ready to have us as partners in the Kingdom.

Jesus responds to each of Peter’s philos with the command (depending on your translation) to “feed my sheep.” Again, the Greek says something a little bit more subtle than our English translation can pick up.

The first “feed my sheep” is better translated as “care for my lambs.” We are to take care of those that are most vulnerable in a physical sense.

The second “feed my sheep” is better translated as “care for my sheep.” We are to care for those that need it, literally to put our arms around them and guide them.

The third “feed my sheep” is better translated as “pasture my sheep.” We are to provide continual nourishment for those that need it.

This was the call to Peter – to do all of these things for those that need it. This is his call, despite the fact that Peter could only bring himself to say that I philos you (Jesus). Jesus knew Peter’s heart, knew what he had done, and still called on him to be the one to take care of the sheep.

And so it is with us. Even though we cannot fully commit to saying that we agape Jesus, we are still to do His will for us, and fundamentally we are to care for those around us.

Yes there was a restoration of Peter after his denial, but more importantly, there was a charge from Jesus to Peter, that Peter was to do what Jesus had laid out before him, no matter what Peter had done before and what he will do in the future. We should also be inspired by this call – that no matter what we have done, how apart we may have been from Jesus in the past, or may be in the future, we can still serve Jesus and do His will.

As a people and a church, this is our calling.

Baseball predictions

I’m going to take a break from normal content to post my baseball predictions for the year.

AL East:

Baltimore

Boston

New York

Toronto

Tampa Bay

AL Central:

Cleveland

Detroit

Chicago

Kansas City

Minnesota

AL West:

Seattle

Los Angeles

Oakland

Houston

Texas

Wildcards: Boston, Los Angeles

AL Champion: Seattle

MVP: Robinson Cano

Cy Young: Felix Hernandez

Rookie of Year: Carlos Rodon

NL East:

Washington

New York

Miami

Atlanta

Philadelphia

NL Central:

St. Louis

Pittsburgh

Milwaukee

Chicago

Cincinnati

NL West:

Los Angeles

San Diego

San Francisco

Colorado

Arizona

Wildcards: Pittsburgh, New York

NL Champions: Washington

MVP: Andrew McCutcheon

Cy Young: Clayton Kershaw

Rookie of the Year: Kris Bryant

World Series: Washington over Seattle

Daily Bible Challenge: Post #5

Matthew 5:21-22

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca, is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”

This my fourth entry of the Daily Bible challenge.

Entry one is here (1 Cor 15:58): http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-1.html

Entry two is here (1 Tim 4:12): http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-2.html

Entry three is here (2 Kings 2:23-24) http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-3.html

Entry four is here (John 1:1) http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-4.html

I do not want break down this passage specifically, but more use it as an example of the way that Jesus teaches and what the implications that means for us as we try to understand Him and to become more Christ-like ourselves.

The key to this teaching, and others like them, is that Jesus takes an accepted teaching and one that we probably take for granted now (to not murder), but states that the standard is not nearly high enough, and that there is a higher expectation. Not only are we not to murder, but we can’t even be angry with someone else. “Raca” was a term of contempt that would result in punishment, but to call someone a fool seems pretty light – and this potentially punishable by hell!

So what is going on here? A couple things:

First, Jesus is setting a high standard. So high, in fact that it is impossible. Not only in this teaching, but in other teachings throughout the Gospels. It is an impossible standard, but one that seems almost achievable. In my mind, this is not an accident. Jesus desires for us to stretch as far as possible without actually fulfilling His teachings and thus becoming complacent in our faith and our walk.

This was the main critique of the Pharisees, that they would achieve perfection in the law and lord it over others, all the while having a problem in their core.

This is the second thing going on, Jesus is not interested in our actions in and of themselves, but is interested in a transformed heart. It is certainly possible to follow rules, but that is not what is most important. What Christ cares about is a transformation of the heart through the work of the Spirit. Not following rules!

The third thing going on is that we are also being made aware of the seriousness of our sin. Something as small as calling someone a fool can result in our spending eternity in hell. In this case, with this standard on his teachings, all of us our ultimately condemned. But that is not the case – Christ offers us life, but this only comes through Him, it is not possible through our own action.

One last point is the idea of sanctification. That is the idea that once we accept Christ and the Spirit into our lives we will see a change in ourselves away from our selfish, sinful ways towards a Spirit filled heart and life. Christ sets an example that is not possible through human action, but is much more possible if we allow the Spirit to work in your life, towards a heart that is more Christ centered.

I touched on many important concepts very quickly and probably did not do them full justice, but wanted to provide a quick overview.

Daily Bible Challenge: Post #4

I broke the rules and took a day off, but it was for my son’s first birthday so I thought that could be forgiven. Here is my post for today.

John 1:1

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

This my fourth entry of the Daily Bible challenge.

Entry one is here (1 Cor 15:58): http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-1.html

Entry two is here (1 Tim 4:12): http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-2.html

Entry three is here (2 Kings 2:23-24) http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-3.html

I think that no Bible verse has consumed more of my thought than this verse. Seems pretty simple on the surface, but it wasn’t until I started studying Greek that this verse really came alive for me.

The English word “Word” in this verse is the Greek word Logos, something that many people would know. Word is a perfectly acceptable translation, but I fear that reading it in English does not fully capture the depth of what is being said here and what it could potentially mean.

Logos was a term that got some play in ancient Greek philosophy. It was certainly not explored by every philosopher and it was only briefly touched on by the biggest names such as Plato and Aristotle, but it is a concept that is certainly worth exploring. There is no perfect way to translate the concept, but the best I could do is to think of it as a presence or a force within the universe that would represent what is good and right, perhaps along the line of “virtue” that is common in so common in later philosophers, especially during the Enlightenment era.

To bring it back to the Bible, I also think that Logos could be a good substitute for “Wisdom” when it is cited in the Proverbs (and other places) as having human characteristics.

So, to summarize this brief thought, John is referring to Jesus as the Logos, a concept that had roots in Greek philosophy and would potentially be the same as the Hebrew/Jewish concept of Wisdom. There is much going on here and potentially even more to the understanding of the true nature of Christ from the very beginning of creation.

One of my goals in life is to take an extremely deep dive into the concept of Logos and how it relates to the Greek philosophical term as well as how it is connected to the concept of Wisdom. But before I can do that, Jesus as Logos will remain as mysterious and tantalizing as when I first came to this potential understanding.

Daily Bible Challenge: Post #3

2 Kings 2:23-24

“Then Elisha went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, “Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!” When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

This my third entry of the Daily Bible challenge.

Entry one is here (1 Cor 15:58): http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-1.html

Entry two is here (1 Tim 4:12): http://stevenuessle.blogspot.com/2015/03/daily-bible-challenge-post-2.html

In my second post I wanted to focus on the youth and setting a good example, but also hinted a little that I was starting to sense I was moving on from considering myself a young leader in the church to just a regular leader. Part of this might be from getting married, buying a house, having a child, all the things that start to happen as you get older and you start to become an adult, and not just a young adult.

Mostly, though, I feel that this change is real because I am becoming old and curmudgeonly enough that I have thought it might be appropriate to unleash a couple of she-bears on a group of unruly youths. I would like to think that it would take more than being taunted for being a baldhead (especially since I have plenty of hair), but I can appreciate where Elisha is coming from.

I think, at the moment, that this is my favorite Bible verse.  While it is badass enough on its own, what makes it especially awesome is that it has nothing to do with the narrative that is happening around it. It is just randomly inserted into the text, perhaps to show the power of Elisha. I can understand if you are Elijah and you use the power of the Lord to rain down fire on the priests of Ba’al, but unleashing a couple of bears on young boys because they are taunting you? That seems a little excessive.

Admittedly commentaries take it a little bit more seriously, suggesting that the youths taunting Elisha represent a bigger insult to the Lord with the potential to discredit Elisha’s ministry if not dealt with quickly and decisively. And baldness, for some reason, was seen as a source of scorn at the time. Still, two bears and 42 youths.

Back at it tomorrow.