I was reading through the sixth chapter of John this evening. What a mind-boggling passage! This chapter alone could compel anyone into years of study. Throughout the teaching, there is an ultimatum, which warrants this passage as being even more worthy of our closest attention: only those who believe that Jesus is the bread of life, and eat His flesh and drink His blood,—they will have true life and live forever. The words of His message must be received by all who claim to believe, because these words “are spirit and are life” (John 6:63 NASB). Will I be caught as one who lacks understanding here? I pray that the Lord will reveal more of the mysteries He spoke thousands of years ago.
Among the mysteries I struggle with, I found in these verses: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (6:44); and “no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father” (6:65). In this there is a paradox that has occurred to me repeatedly over the years. Perhaps it’s only a paradox that I’ve invented, and perhaps there is nothing really paradoxical in the truth. The paradox I feel is that Jesus came to save the world, and even then only those whom the Father draws can truly come to Christ; it seems He is a savior to all and at the same time a savior only to the elect. This is similar to the mystery of God’s choice to make the Jews, Abraham’s descendants, His own people. His choice there seems to be explained by His strategy (mysterious as it is) to reveal His glory to and through men in time. Is it thus with those whom He draws to Christ? Can it be explained away by admitting that God already knows who will choose His way and who won’t? This doesn’t seem nearly sufficient to me. Though one could brush my questions aside and say, “God’s thoughts are too high for you,” I think there is an answer hidden in the Scriptures. Do I give myself too much credit, as Job did, to think that I can know the mind of God? I don’t ask for knowledge of all mysteries, but knowledge of the gospel, which is revealed to us in Christ Jesus. It seems this is something I cannot explain and have not yet comprehended. In the midst of these questions and speculations, this much I know from the chapter I’ve read: in Christ there is eternal life (ref. 6:27); the Father has set His seal on the Son, giving Him the authority to give eternal life to whom the Father will (ref. 6:27,38); and only those whom the Father has drawn to Christ can ever receive Him and the eternal life He gives (ref. 6:44,65). With this laid out, it seems more likely that the only paradox is found within myself, within my own speculations and assumptions.
Other than my roundabout contemplation, I’m doing well this evening. I saw Eric yesterday and today. I haven’t started typing my Freshman Essay at all while I’ve been here, and I should probably begin that work tomorrow. I’ve been thoroughly enjoying that book I mentioned, Ravi Zacharias’s Can Man Live Without God. The man wields a masterful apologetic mind, but it’s important for me to subject the arguments of this Christian man to the same scrutiny I would Plato, Aristotle, Pascal, Kant, or Nietzsche (to name a few). He is, after all, presenting an argument for faith, and I don’t want to roll over and let myself be convinced by an argument that wouldn’t convince any of my peers. I want authenticity and reality in my personal philosophy, because I want to live authentically and really for the Lord in the sight of men. It’s an excellent book, and I recommend it (as I’m about one-third of the way into it), but it’s important for readers to understand that one argument for faith isn’t going to solve the world’s problems. Faith itself will bring a person into the salvation of God; however, the purpose of the argument is to combat the deception of the world, and unfortunately (perhaps cynically I opine this) the deception will not be entirely defeated until all things are revealed at the world’s end.
Among the mysteries I struggle with, I found in these verses: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (6:44); and “no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father” (6:65). In this there is a paradox that has occurred to me repeatedly over the years. Perhaps it’s only a paradox that I’ve invented, and perhaps there is nothing really paradoxical in the truth. The paradox I feel is that Jesus came to save the world, and even then only those whom the Father draws can truly come to Christ; it seems He is a savior to all and at the same time a savior only to the elect. This is similar to the mystery of God’s choice to make the Jews, Abraham’s descendants, His own people. His choice there seems to be explained by His strategy (mysterious as it is) to reveal His glory to and through men in time. Is it thus with those whom He draws to Christ? Can it be explained away by admitting that God already knows who will choose His way and who won’t? This doesn’t seem nearly sufficient to me. Though one could brush my questions aside and say, “God’s thoughts are too high for you,” I think there is an answer hidden in the Scriptures. Do I give myself too much credit, as Job did, to think that I can know the mind of God? I don’t ask for knowledge of all mysteries, but knowledge of the gospel, which is revealed to us in Christ Jesus. It seems this is something I cannot explain and have not yet comprehended. In the midst of these questions and speculations, this much I know from the chapter I’ve read: in Christ there is eternal life (ref. 6:27); the Father has set His seal on the Son, giving Him the authority to give eternal life to whom the Father will (ref. 6:27,38); and only those whom the Father has drawn to Christ can ever receive Him and the eternal life He gives (ref. 6:44,65). With this laid out, it seems more likely that the only paradox is found within myself, within my own speculations and assumptions.
Other than my roundabout contemplation, I’m doing well this evening. I saw Eric yesterday and today. I haven’t started typing my Freshman Essay at all while I’ve been here, and I should probably begin that work tomorrow. I’ve been thoroughly enjoying that book I mentioned, Ravi Zacharias’s Can Man Live Without God. The man wields a masterful apologetic mind, but it’s important for me to subject the arguments of this Christian man to the same scrutiny I would Plato, Aristotle, Pascal, Kant, or Nietzsche (to name a few). He is, after all, presenting an argument for faith, and I don’t want to roll over and let myself be convinced by an argument that wouldn’t convince any of my peers. I want authenticity and reality in my personal philosophy, because I want to live authentically and really for the Lord in the sight of men. It’s an excellent book, and I recommend it (as I’m about one-third of the way into it), but it’s important for readers to understand that one argument for faith isn’t going to solve the world’s problems. Faith itself will bring a person into the salvation of God; however, the purpose of the argument is to combat the deception of the world, and unfortunately (perhaps cynically I opine this) the deception will not be entirely defeated until all things are revealed at the world’s end.
No comments:
Post a Comment