No word from God will ever fail.

Merry Christmas everyone.

This amazing promise is made to Mary in Luke 1:37. It caught my attention this year as we were working through the Christmas accounts. Frankly, I did not remember it being there before! And for good reason. Ever since the King James Version came out a few years ago (like 400), most English translations rendered this verse like this: "for nothing is impossible with God."

For the last number of years I have been using the TNIV, which was an update of the hugely popular NIV, which you probably use. This year (2011), the NIV underwent a revision, now called NIV (2011), and they no longer print the TNIV or the older version NIV. Anyway, the TNIV, and now the NIV (2011) render this verse, not like the KJV did, but instead they say, "No word from God will ever fail."

So what does the verse really say, and more importantly,what does it mean?

OK, bear with me here. There are two things in question regarding the meaning of the verse.

First is how to read the word translated "word" and which seems not even to be present in the KJV translation, but it is. The Greek word lying behind our translation is rhema. Rhema is one of two primary words for "word" in Greek, the first one being logos. In John 1 when we read "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God", it is logos. Logos means something like "expression" or "thought" or "reasoning." We get the English word "logic" from this word. But in Luke 1:37, when the angel speaks to Mary, she uses another Greek word for word: rhema. Rhema refers more so to a specific word or expression. It refers to something specific which is said, or even to a specific thing that is done. When the shepherds say, "let us go to Bethlehm and see this thing that has happened" (Luke 2:15), "thing" is a translation of rhema. Also when Mary pondered all these "things" it is rhema.


Rhema is often used, however, to record a specific word or command that God brought to someone for a specific task or need. In Ephesians 6, when we are told to put on the whole armor of God and to take up the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. It is rhema. In other words, we need the Bible all the time, but in the heat of battle we need the specific word (think the right ammunition) in order to be victorious in that moment, facing that specific situation. We need a rhema word from God.

These verses are examples of rhema as a specific word from God to a person: Matt 4:4, 26:75; Luke 1:38, 2:29; 3:2, 5:5, 24:6 (and more, but I do not have the time right now).

So the first question is whether or not to read rhema as "word" or "thing" The NIV (2011) chose "word" and the older NIV chose "thing," implied in "Nothing (no thing) is impossible with God." It seems most natural to read it as "word." The angel had just delivered an amazing prophetic word to Mary and she asked, "How can this be?" The angel explained about the agency of the Holy Spirit and then said, "no Word from God will ever fail."

Second is a decision whether or not to read the verb as present or future tense. The verb in the sentence is "impossible." The Greek word is future tense, active voice, indicative mood. There is really no reason not to read it as future. The translators who chose present tense (as in, Nothing is impossible) do so, I think from what I have read, simply because they think the context warrants it. In other words, the angel is speaking to Mary about her experience in that moment. However, it seems to me that the angel is also assuring Mary of events that will happen--she will conceive, give birth to the Messiah, etc.

So with these things in mind, we have a major shift in the way this verse is rendered: from the old translation; "Nothing is impossible with God" to the newer one "No word from God will ever fail." The meaning is not that much different; certainly the older rendition is true. However, the newer one is much more accurate, it seems to me, and opens up for us some new thoughts, which I explored in my Christmas morning meditation.

One of those thoughts for me is simply this: When God comes to me with a Word--a command, a promise, an encouragement--and I truly know it is God--that Word will never fail. It will happen, sooner or later. And, that Word, as hard as it may seem to me, will not be impossible for me to accomplish, or bear, or fulfill. I can do what God asks me to do. No doubt Mary wondered--am I up to this task, can I do this, will I be strong enough. Where God guides he provides. We can do the things God asks us to do.

Isn't God grand!

Thanks for digging deeper.

Jesus, Our Greatest Joy

On Christmas Eve we end our Advent/Christmas series by looking at the song of Mary that she utters while visiting Elizabeth (Luke 1:46-56). I'm particularly interested in the idea of joy, which I develop somewhat in the message.

Luke's Gospel is the story of joy. He uses "joy" or "rejoice," or one of its forms, 21 times. Luke is a rather long book (the longest of all four Gospels) and so 21 might not seem like a lot unless one views it over against the other Gospels. Matthew uses joy (or one of its forms) 4 times, Mark only once and John 13 times. The word is scattered throughout the epistles with rather even regularity, except Philippians which has 12 occurrences. It is often considered the epistle of Joy.

Here are all the references for "joy" or its various forms in the Gospel of Luke: Luke 1:14 (2); 1:44; 1:47; 1:58; 2:10; 6:23 (2); 8:13; 10:17; 10:20 (2); 10:21; 15:5; 15:6; 15:7; 15:9; 15:10; 19:37; 24:41; 24:52.

Mary's song is often called the Magnificat (from the first word of the song in Latin), and it has inspired a huge amount of music, from Bach to contemporary singers. It is one of what I consider to be the five "songs" of Christmas, the others being: Zechariah's song in Luke 1:67-80; Elizabeth's praise in 1:39-45; the Angels' declaration to the shepherds in Luke 2:13-16; and Simeon's prophecy when Jesus was presented at the temple (Luke 2:28-35).

Joy permeates Mary's song, as it should. Jesus is our Greatest Joy. However, we should not mistake joy for happiness, or vise versa. Happiness is too often dependent upon circumstances. (Actually the word "happiness" is built on the Old English word "happenstance" which means "circumstance".) In other words, if your day goes well (meaning the circumstances of your day were what you like), then you are happy. If not, you are sad. Joy, on the other hand, is not a fleeting emotion dependent upon your day but rather a deep seated knowing that you are loved by God and that he always wills good for you and that he is willing and able to extract good from any and all circumstances (Romans 8:28).

In Jesus we have true Joy. Check out 1 Peter 1:3-9. Our joy is inexpressible and full of glory.

Thanks for digging deeper, and Merry Christmas.

Jesus, Our Greatest Encouragement

One of the ideas we bump into with this passage, specifically from Luke 1:43, is the idea of Mary being the Mother of God. In her joy, Elizabeth cries out, "But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"

Our Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters speak of Mary, Mother of God, though they mean slightly different things by it. This Wikipedia article does a rather good job of outlining the source of this idea and its various meanings: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_of_God

Of course the Bible never uses this language (Mother of God) and as you read in the wiki article, you learn it was not until the 3rd century of the Christian Era that the church began using it. The closest thing we get in the Bible is here in Luke 1:43; Mary is the Mother of our Lord.

Naturally there is no way we can speak of Mary as being the Mother of God meaning that she gave birth to God and thus brought him into being. That would be absurd, and is not part of the theology of any of the churches that use this phrase. Mary is the mother of Jesus, who was fully human and also fully divine. I would guess Mary's DNA shaped the physical life of Jesus, but she did not create God. Jesus is fully God, but God is not fully Jesus. In other words, God exists in three entities, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He exists in all three of these entities throughout eternity. It was the Son who came into Mary and took up residence in the body of Jesus of Nazareth, from his very conception, rendering Him true God and true Man. So Jesus has the fullness of God residing in him; but God is more than Jesus.

Not sure that makes sense. The idea is that Mary was the "bearer of God" (which is the literal meaning of theotokos), not the originator or creator of God.

Mary has caught the attention and imagination of the Christian church ever since its inception on the Day of Pentecost (which Mary attended, by the way). It is very easy to either over venerate her (an error Protestants believe Catholics make) or to under appreciate her (an error Catholics believe Protestants make). Here is a good read that purports to give "just the facts" about Mary and what the church as believed, or at least, considered. http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/beliefs/mary.htm#theotokos


Since the canonical Gospels only give enough information about the infancy and early life of Jesus to wet our imagination, the early church (second and third centuries) saw a proliferation of writings full of speculations about the early years of Jesus. These pseudepigrapha are filled with wild imaginative stories that are clearly fanciful, but make for interesting reading and have in some ways led to spurious ideas about Mary. Here is one of them (written about a hundred years after the Gospel of Mark) http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/infancyjames-roberts.html

I have long since felt that while protesting some Catholic ideas about Mary (specifically her veneration) the Protestant churches sort of "threw out the baby with the bath water" and became as guilty of undervaluing Mary as they felt the Catholics were in overvaluing her. Anyway, as Anabaptists, who supposedly are neither Catholic nor Protestant, we are free to find our own way.

Thank for digging deeper.

The Valley of the Shadow

This message is not part of our Advent series, but one I delivered at the memorial service for Mel, Patti and Rachel Rissler. It is based on Psalm 23.

I built the sermon around a new insight I had to verse 4; "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; For You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me." Maybe it is because I usually am working with this psalm during a time of death, but I always tended to think of the valley of the shadow as referring to the journey one makes from this life to the next. In other words it is a valley defined by death. Of course, that is true, this valley does refer to that.

My new thought--no doubt not a very original one, but giving me some deeper meaning to this verse--I think it also applies to any one of us who have the "shadow of death" cast across our lives because we have been led into a valley of death by the loss of someone we have known, or someone close to us has lost someone they have loved.

No doubt the very tragic nature of the death of the Risslers and the wide spread publicity it has brought to our community, served to open my eyes to this angle on the verse.

The promise of the Psalm is that whenever we experience the pain of death, God is with us to lead us through.

I know in a much larger sense, the words "Valley of the Shadow" can apply to any difficult experience we face in life. The Hebrew word translated "Valley of the Shadow" is a favorite of Job, being used in each of these verses his his book: 3:5; 10:21-22; 12:22; 16:16; 24:17 (twice); 28:3; 34:22; 38:17. It also occurs occasionally in other Psalms: 44:19; 107:10,14; and in Jer 2:6; 13:16; Isa 9:2; and Amos 5:8. Best to read these verses in the KJV or otherwise the word may be translated differently.

In many of those verses the word refers to a wide range of negative life experiences and not specifically death. So there is good reason for reading Psalm 23:4 as referring not just to experiences of death, but to other life situations which are difficult. Nevertheless, the verse does apply to valleys defined by death.

For me, I gained new insight into this promise as I thought about how the shadow of death is cast across our lives whenever we lose a loved one, and tried in this message to work out some encouragement from that perspective.

You can read my message here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tf70e1EnWBy1znDKmHmSzwNfj_hMhQ4IylyjGM3iRVk/edit?hl=en_US

Jesus, Our Greatest Promise

There are two things about this message that capture my heart. The one is the story of Zechariah and Elizabeth. Here is a bit of info about how the priest hood was structured, with reference to source material for those interested:

Luke 1:8 -- The number 18,000 emerges from information in the Letter to Aristeas 95, which notes that about 750 priests were a part of each of the 24 divisions of the priesthood. So 24 times 750 is 18,000. On the 24 divisions in the priesthood, see 1 Chron 24:7-18. Zechariah belongs to the eighth division of Abijah (Luke 1:5). Details of how the daily offering proceeded are in m. Yoma 2:2-4 and m. Tamid 6—7. This offering took place at 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. each day. Given the nature of the crowd, most scholars believe an evening offering is in view here (Josephus Antiquities 14.4 .3 §65; m. Pesaµim 5:1).
(from IVP New Testament Commentary Series © 1992-2004. All rights reserved.)

Just think about how long Zach and Liz may have been praying for a son, and the fact that they were no doubt simply praying for a child, for their own fulfillment, and not really thinking about how their child might be used of God to further the kingdom. They receive an answer, and one that far surpassed their request. Wow, what an awesome God.

One point I learn from this is the one I make in this sermon--the answers to our individual prayers are somehow linked with the bigger things God is doing to build his kingdom here on earth. Remember in the Lord's prayer, daily bread and thy kingdom come are connected.

So this leads me to a second thing to contemplate--why are some of our prayers not answered--or I should say, why do we get "no" as an answer to some, maybe most, of our prayers.

This past spring while attending a seminar in Chicago, I had the very unique privilege of hearing renowned teacher and writer, Dallas Willard, speak on the topic of spiritual formation. In the course of that talk, he said, sort of in passing, this: "The really good thing about prayer is that God does not answer most of them!" That sort of set me back on my can a bit.

In this sermon I quote James 4:3 where it says, "When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures." If our motives are wrong when we pray, and we are not really looking out for the Kingdom but rather concerned for ourselves, then it is a good thing that God says 'no."

Here is a decent read by David Wilkerson in which he discusses six reasons why prayers are not answered.
http://www.tscpulpitseries.org/english/undated/tssixrea.html

I would add one more reason to Wilkerson's six, based on 1 Peter 3:7. If our relationship at home, particularly spousal, is not solid, I should expect a negative impact on my relationship with God and in the area of effective prayer. That verse says this: "Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers."


Thanks for digging deeper

Jesus, Our Greatest Story

When the angel appeared to the shepherds in Luke 2, he said his announcement would be "good news" to them. "Good news" translates the Greek word "euangelion" which we traditionally have translated "gospel." "Gospel" is an Old English word (remember the musical Godspell) meaning "to bring good news." Take a moment to look at this Greek word "euangelion." Do you see the word "angel" in it. An angel is essentially a messenger, and that is the root meaning of the word. Notice the prefix "eu." Think of "eulogy." A eulogy is a good word about someone, usually a deceased person. (Eulogy--"eu" meaning good, "logy" from the Greek word for "word", "logos.") (Now I'm sounding like this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL9whwwTK6I.)

So the Gospel is good news. But good news about what? In this sermon we explore two things: 1) what is the Gospel and 2) what should I do about it? In each case the shepherds from the Christmas story provide a backdrop for helping us understand the response to both these questions.

Link here to listen to two of today's leading Christian teachers, from vastly different church traditions, speak about the Gospel: John Piper http://thegospelcoalition.org/resources/video/What-Is-The-Gospel---John-Piper
 and Mark Driscoll http://marshill.com/about/the-gospel. I really like Piper's comment that "God is the Treasure." I will reference this in the sermon.

But this sermon is mostly about the urgency to share our faith. Many of us do not know how to do that, when it is as simple as telling our story--what does Jesus mean to me and what difference does God make in my life. Every believer in Jesus has a unique story of how they were loved by God into the kingdom and how this journey with God has changed their lives. It is our unique story. It is a story that someone else needs to hear.

"A hitchhiker's guide to evangelism" is a ministry dedicated to helping people share their faith in today's multi-cultural world. Link here http://hitchhikersguidetoevangelism.com/ and scroll down the page to review his six steps to faith sharing today. Step 3 addresses the focus of this second sermon in our Advent series.

Thanks for digging deeper.