Sundays are special.

It’s a good opportunity to get some rest and reflect on what I’ve accomplished and worship the One Who makes that possible.

It’s an occasion to celebrate a time-honored tradition which has evolved from an ancient Jewish ordinance the Lord gave to his people over five-thousand years ago.

More specifically, He commanded His firstborn Israel not to do any work on the seventh day of their week, but rather to rest [נוּחַ nūach: to rest] and remember that He delivered them from bondage out of Egypt.  In doing so, they would sanctify—or dedicate that time to Him.  [Deut. 5:12-15]

It was a “decompression” mandate, requiring them unwind and set aside time to worship and reflect upon Him.  But it was also symbolic of His creation narrative [see: Exod. 20: 8-11]:

“By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.  This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.”  [Gen. 2:2-4] [my emphasis]

[שָׁבַת shabath: to cease, desist, rest]

And I’m not sure why, but many of us who live under the New Covenant of Jesus Christ insist that His people are still required to observe a specific time period of complete rest and worship before Him. But neither Jesus nor any New Testament author ever demanded such a thing.

In fact, the Bible doesn’t reveal any other relevant use of the word “rest” until the reader opens up the Book of Hebrews.  The author records the Greek noun κατάπαυσις [kâtâpâwsîs; rest, repose] six times, corresponding to the same Hebrew term נוּחַ [nūach: to rest] noted above in the Old Testament Writings.

So I’m convinced the context of these passages in the Hebrew letter would satisfy any questions about whether or not it’s okay to be productive or have fun on Sundays.  

Because the issue isn’t about when or how to rest, but rather about “how to enter into it.”

But why would anyone need to “enter into it?”  Doesn’t it just roll around every seven days?  Not only that, vs. 4:9 clearly states that “…there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.” The context of the third and fourth chapters makes it clear. After the author documented the Genesis narrative to the reader [vss. 3:8-11], he then submitted questions:

“For who provoked Him when they had heard?  Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?  And with whom was He angry for forty years?  Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?  And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient? [Heb. 3:16-18]  [my emphasis]

In this case, being able to enter into the land where God’s people Israel were destined to “receive rest” was clearly contingent upon the absence of their whining and disobedience:

So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief. Therefore, let us fear if, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you may seem to have come short of it.”   [Heb. 3:19-4:1]  [my emphasis]

Hm-m. The same goes for me, I guess.

The author of Hebrews recognized Christ’s New Covenant “rest” as being a means to the goal of obedience to the Living God:

“For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His. Therefore let us be diligent to enter that rest, so that no one will fall, through following the same example of disobedience.”  [Heb. 4: 10-11]  [my emphasis]

Self-sufficiency is the foundation on which disobedience is built and sustained.  The ancient tribes of Israel were good at it.  It seems that when I decide to “rest” from [or stop relying upon] my own sufficiency to secure righteousness and instead regard Christ’s sufficiency as enough, I’m on the fast track toward entering into the miraculous domain He referred to as “His rest.”

Throughout the Old and New Testaments, the concept of rest is clearly perceived by the authors as the ideal combination of security, meaningful fellowship and genuine contentment.  Jesus’ parables describing life in the Kingdom of the next age never hinted of idle servants lying around playing harps and sucking on grapes.

On the contrary, His visions portrayed confident, hard-working and obedient servants having great responsibilities and loving every minute of it!

Complete sufficiency in Christ the King allows me to “rest” from the folly of my own.

Besides, I don’t like grapes anyway.

I’ve noticed a disturbing paradigm shift in logic over the years.

When it comes to developing a realistic solution for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families from random episodes of mass murder carried out in public places, every viable resolution digresses back to the subject of installing better door locks or to seeking to try to better understand the nature of erratic, violent behavior.  

In other words, how do we second guess the unpredictable? 

It’s as if any suggestion to teach potential victims that tactical physical resistance to criminal violence is completely out of the question.

Taking the offensive in a life-threatening situation has been re-defined as a barbaric, risky recourse to criminal activity, especially in a public setting.  And, while it’s true that an unprepared response to violence can sometimes trigger a deeper crisis, men who claim to belong to Jesus Christ must seek to protect what is precious in His eyes.

Building a godly family is crucial to sustaining any moral society and is an essential goal for any father in Christ’s Body.  To be successful though, he must be able to convey Biblical principles about what’s right and what’s wrong to his children.  More importantly, as the object of a male role model, a son will most likely adopt his father’s standards connected to the value of human life.

That would include teaching him about defending his own life and the ones he loves.

If a criminal somehow breaches the inviolable barriers of a family residence with the intent of stealing or harming the occupants, the godly father will engage him with deadly force, because he knows there’s no Scriptural basis for cowardice.  The prudent father would already even have devised a rational plan for minimizing loss or injury and be sure everyone was properly trained for the unexpected.  

He’d do whatever it takes.

A father is entrusted with the welfare of his children from his Creator.  He’s accountable to the Lord for teaching them all he can about Him and His word primarily through his actions as a role model.  If an evil man slaps his face, he turns the other cheek.  If his neighbor sues him, he gives him more than is demanded.

But if someone wants to kill him, he knows it’s not right to just hand over the goods.

While the Christian model is to tolerate a reasonable degree of unreasonable behavior, neither Jesus Christ nor His disciples ever taught anyone to willingly give up his life to the cruelty of an unsound mind.

A wise father sleeps well knowing that a plan to secure the safety of his children in public institutions has been implemented.  The authority of parents to execute whatever strategy is necessary for protecting their children is vested in them both legally and Biblically—regardless of where it is.

My fear is that too many young boys are being taught that violent, psychotic behavior is an ever-increasing fact of life against which there seems to be no recourse, and that when it happens, the only option is to run and hide.

Is it because the sanctity of life is an expendable asset in the face of fear?

May it never be!

 

Life’s what it’s all about!

The desire to live is inherent, whether in the present or in the future.

That’s why essentially every religion that was ever fabricated by the human mind promises some form of rewarded supernatural existence in an “afterlife.”  And they all contain a fundamental premise. To be specific, divine authority is prominently established in a sovereign entity.  

Yet, any provision to actually experience real fellowship or intimacy with that sovereign authority is mysteriously absent.

[Do you know life’s Source? see: LIFE IN THE BALANCE:  Knowing Its Source]

Every created soul longs for a genuine connection to something greater than himself.  But even though the hope of Jesus Christ’s disciple lies in a future resurrection of the righteous dead, he seeks reliance and fellowship with the Holy Spirit Himself in real time.

His God doesn’t exist in a shroud of obscurity, only to show up in some form of paradise to repay his behavior.  His God has an ongoing, relational investment in him whom He chose to accomplish His own will.  And He’s able to demonstrate His very presence in his life for that purpose.

So, if his life is indeed bound up together with his God, what would it look like to the rest of the world?

It would surely be emblematic of the One whose Spirit he chooses to be led by. 

Though the world despises the Christ and the ones who love Him, it can’t seem to explain the spectacle of joy and peace so visible in the lives of those it otherwise loathes.  It simply cannot comprehend the current magnificence of something which traditions and myths predict to be a future event.

Thus, we rejoice that what Jesus referred to as “life eternal” isn’t merely something we look forward to, but something we presently experience on a certain level. 

[What’s “life eternal?” see: The Precious Pearl of Life.]

In his letter to Timothy, [his] true child in the faith, the apostle Paul urged him to convince Christ’s disciples to “store up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they might take hold of that which is life indeed.”  The Greek verb ἐπιλαμβάνομαι means to take hold, catch, trap or seize.  Nothing in the grammar suggests this to be an action exclusive to the future.

As Jesus Christ’s disciple, my ability to get my hands on this life seems to parallel the sanctifying [or cleansing] process going on in me right now as well as any desire I might have to abide in HIm.  To abide in Him means to adhere to the principles He taught.

But in order to do that, I not only need the presence of His Spirit, but also the support and encouragement from His Body.  Without this spiritual sustenance, another false doctrine could easily reveal itself as a shinier marble.

The offer from the Source of life isn’t just a promise–like a promissory note to be tucked away and redeemed at the proper time.  

But I can certainly take it to the bank.

I know that life is good.

It has to be.  It was created, and everything the Lord God created was good.  [Gen. 1:31]

The author of Genesis illustrated the Source of life to the reader through the image of a fruit bearing tree in the middle of a perfect environment.  In the same manner, our Lord Jesus Christ demonstrated that same Source to be only through Him existing in the center or our lives.

But nothing in the texts of the New Testament reveals many details concerning what His term “life” actually consisted of.  It would, however, be reasonable to assume that most everyone He taught already had some understanding of what He meant by it.  

[What’s “eternal life?” see:  The Precious Pearl of Life.]

In fact, the Gospel accounts suggest that any interest in the subject probably surfaced as an inquiry about how to get it rather than what it was. [see: Mk. 10:17, Lk. 10:25]  

But does the present day disciple of Christ actually perceive life in the same way that the Teacher Himself and the apostolic authors did?  

For example, consider Jesus’ response to a group of the Jews during a feast in Jerusalem as recorded in the gospel account of John:

Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.  For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will marvel.

For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, in the same manner, the Son also gives life to whom He wishes.  For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all might honor the Son even as they honor the Father.

He who is not honoring the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who is hearing My word, and believing in Him who sent Me, possesses eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has moved out of the death into the life.

Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear shall live.  For just as the Father has life in Himself, in the same manner, He also gave to the Son to have life in Himself; and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man.

Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.”  [Jn. 5:19-29]  [my emphasis] 

The first conclusion I could draw from this passage would be that a distinct, unshared capacity to give life exists in the Father, Who has life in Himself.  Also, the Father gave that same ability to have life in Himself to the Son, Who does everything in like manner of His Father.

I’d also be careful to note Jesus’ words concerning exactly who actually “possesses life” and recognize the continuous aspect of the phrases “hearing my words” and “believing in Him,” indicating that Jesus considered anyone possessing life to be demonstrating a consistent, obedient lifestyle as a testimony to the principles He was teaching. 

But what could I expect as a result of possessing life?  Having “moved” out of death into life, can I consider myself immortal at that point?

[Are God’s people immortal?  see: Bridging the common gap of fear.]

I could, but I’d have to totally disregard the obvious.  Both Jesus and the Biblical authors often defined this term “life” using the adjective “eternal,” suggesting that immortality defines an ultimate quality of living meant to be experienced only through the miracle of a life-giving resurrection.

A popular translation of Jn. 5:24  reads:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.”

It’s easy to assume that this sentence confirms that I will never die if I already understand it to mean that when I read it.  But the context neither addresses nor cancels the inevitability of human death. Jesus was asserting that the one who in fact “has” [or who is possessing] life shall not be judged on the basis of his belief.  And, that, on that basis, he’s able to regard himself as one in custody and ownership of that possession.

As a result, he shows the Son—and the world, that he does indeed possess that life through his words and actions.  His possession is in the form of a type of down payment, to be fully realized beginning with a miraculous future life-giving event confirmed by the Author of life Himself.  [read: Jn. 5:29 again]

Can you hear what the Source of life says?  How many chances will I get to lay my hands on that life which only the Son can give back?

And who will deny Him that sole authority?