December 15, 2009

Have yourself a contextual Christmas!

1 John 1:1–5

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

W

hen we think of the Christmas story, we tend to think of the narratives written by Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Those are the classic stories of Christ’s birth—the ones we read each year to the kids in our Sunday school classes and to our families on Christmas Day. But the apostle John wrote of Christ’s birth as well. And while John’s gospel has the reputation of being a bit more “warm and fuzzy” because it shows God’s love for mankind so clearly, John’s telling of Christ’s birth doesn’t contain the warm fuzzies that the other gospel narratives contain. We don’t hear about the shepherds, the star, the inn with no room, the manger, the wise men, or the journey for the census. John’s narrative is chock-full of theology and gets to the heart of why Jesus came to the earth.

But the thing that jumped out at me when our pastor preached an Advent sermon from John 1:1–13 this past Sunday was how quickly we can get our theology off-track by pulling things out of context.

It is obvious right from the start that John wants to address some theology in his telling of Christ’s birth. He begins his story not in Judea or Bethlehem, but before the creation of the world. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. In so doing, he addresses the fact that Jesus Christ is eternally existent with the Father. Then he goes on to show that Jesus was the actual Creator of all things: All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:9–11

The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him.

The narrative goes on and talks about John the Baptist, whose job it was to declare the coming of the Christ. And then John’s narrative comes to the part that makes us view John’s gospel as the warm fuzzy—the comfortable gospel. This is the reason that Campus Crusade for Christ and so many others hand out small books containing only the Gospel of John. John presents the gospel message to everyone, just as we are all commanded to do: He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God. These words from John 1:11-12 are so familiar that most Christians can quote them from a very early age. But so many young people grow up with a skewed understanding of the theology John is proclaiming here. They sense the wonderful offer (and it is truly wonderful) being offered to all people: “believe in Jesus and you will be saved.” And this is the good news—the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Unfortunately, our failure to teach our children the remainder of the sentence (found in verse 13) has caused a tremendous amount of theological problems. Those problems have contributed to the high pressure tactics common at revival meetings and door-to-door evangelism. They have also contributed to many people’s belief that they are saved when in fact they are not. Many Christians tell folks that if they’ll just “pray the prayer” or “walk down the aisle to make a profession of faith” they are saved. They further the problem by telling those folks, “once saved, always saved.” In essence, they tell these folks who walked the aisle or prayed the “Sinner’s Prayer” that they are now in—they don’t have to worry about it any more. That nothing they could do now could separate them from the Father’s love. And while their intentions are honorable, they do these folks a tremendous disservice.

John 1:12–13

But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Yes, God’s love is extravagant and free. Yes, He saves believers permanently and “no man can pluck them from [His] hand.” But John 1:13 carries the concept forward a bit and puts a deeper theological twist to the gospel message. John 1:13 explains exactly who will receive Jesus—exactly who will believe in His name and be given the right to become the children of God.

John 1:13 says: who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Imagine a discussion of unconditional election and effectual (irresistible) grace right here in the story of Christ’s birth. The gospel message is to be proclaimed to all, but those who will respond will do so not because of their ethnic or religious heritage (not of blood), and not because of the faith of their forefathers (the will of the flesh), and not because of the their own contribution of faith (the will of man), but they will respond because of the will of God. The very God who created the universe and all that is in it came to earth to provide the sacrifice for all those who He himself wills to believe.

This is the birth of the total Sovereign over all. What a wonderful season. What wonderful theological concepts. To God alone be the glory! Soli Deo gloria!

 

2 comments:

  1. My impression has been for many years that the "will of the flesh or the will of man" refers to a husband's sexual desire which generates a child in the normal, earthly course of events. If I recall correctly, the Greek for "man" in that phrase is "andros" (as opposed to "anthropos")--a man, a specific male person. Can also be translated "a husband" and is so translated in some versions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It seems to me that since both of those were listed together, they must have carried a different nuance of meaning. I'm not sure which is which, but I think the two together cover offspring (sexual desire, which generates a child), which I explained as faith of your forefathers--basically a religious ethnic heritage, and personal accomplishment or faith that we have personally mustered under our own power.

    The very interesting thing to me, however, is that in a discussion of Christ's coming to earth, John focuses on theology rather than the description of the events and the major players.

    ReplyDelete

No personal attacks. No profanity.

Please keep your comments in good taste. Leave a name so we know who you are. Your comments are welcome, but anonymous flames and sacrilege will be deleted.