The good news is that one day the thin veil that separates heaven and earth will be drawn aside and the Jesus who Christians believe is personally present though hidden in the heavenly dimension at the moment will be the central figure of that new world. That’s why some of the New Testament writers don’t talk about his coming they talk about his appearing. He is present but hidden and will one day appear. And when he does it will be in order to set everything right–all those prophecies about God doing justice at last will come true through him–and all because of the resurrection. That’s what Paul said was the climax of his speech in Athens before all the skeptical philosophers of his day. They were not really up for this stuff at all. He said God has fixed a day on which he will judge the world, in other words, call the whole world to account, and put it right. And he will do it through a man whom he has appointed and of this he has given assurance to all people by raising him from the dead. That is the center of the Christian message.

And then, of course, it goes on, that in that new world those who are in Christ will be given new bodies. The resurrection of the body–it’s a totally strange doctrine to many devout Christians who really do think that the name of the game is to get their soul into a disembodied place called heaven. And when they say, “I believe in the resurrection of the body,” in the creed, they think, “but I don’t really mean that, we actually know it’s the immortality of the soul.” Well, that’s just being fooled by the incipient Platonism of much Western culture. But, if you have that vision of creation and that vision of justice then resurrection, as I’ve said, is where you get. And the point is this: the physicality that we are promised in the future is an immortal physicality. Immortality doesn’t mean disembodiment, that’s a Platonic lie. It is, Paul said, an immortal physicality; it will go through death and out the other side. It is not a resuscitation; it’s a different body but in continuity with the present one.

Here is the link if you are interested.

I would also like to mention that Karl has done a basic Greek course and it is available online as well. The advantage of Karl’s is that he uses modern pronunciation which may be helpful if you decide to transition to modern Greek later on (or if you just want to impress the waitress at the diner).

McKnight goes through each NT text that contains the word wrath, and analyzes it to see if it is talking about either a historical wrath, or an eternal/evangelistic wrath as is commonly presented in Gospel evangelizations (i.e. the Way of the Master). Ultimately, he finds a variety of texts that support both ideas, which is, of course, to be expected.

We should understand that God does act now in this time in ways of judgment. When we read the prophets that God sets up kingdoms and tears down kingdoms - this is only one way. When Jesus is asked whether the tower of Siloam falling on these men, or Pilate’s killing of men to be mixed with the sacrifice, is because they are being judged by God, Jesus replies that they were not judged by God. However, he tells them that unless they, the askers, repent, they will be judged by God. And this is talking about God acting in history.

And that gets me to my question. How can we know what God is working through? We know that God acts now in history. Both redeeming and restoring. Both watching and judging. Perhaps it isn’t even the answer in the immediate time that is important, but the thought? I’m interested in hearing your thoughts.

Still, these “appearances” seem to be a direct contradiction of many other plainly clear Scriptural statements where God is said to be invisible, and no man can see Him or has ever seen Him nor heard His voice. How can this be? How can Scripture describe an event of God appearing to man, then turn around and have God saying He doesn’t appear to man? The answer is easy once one looks at the entirety of Scripture and applies the Hebrew custom of the “law of agency” where one’s “agent” is regarded and treated identical to the one they are representing.

To go into greater detail in comparing the clear Biblical verses that tell us that God can NOT be seen with the events where God is suppose to appear “in person”, please read the following article by John Cordaro - ” THEOPHANIES AND CHRISTOPHANIES“. John presents this subject out in an excellent manner and shows that God indeed has never been seen, but used his authorized representatives in those “appearances”. Additionally, for even more detail on those appearances - and from a Jewish perspective - check out this article (written in an outstanding series of articles) from fellow unitarian Messianic - Uri Marcus: “The Theophanies (Alleged appearances of God to humans)”.

Many people suggest that Jesus’ cry of “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me” was the point where the Father could not be with his son because he had become the offering for sin for the world and God can’t be near that. Though the reasoning sounds nice, it is not the case. As this video shows beautifully, Jesus was quoting the first line of Psalm 22, a Psalm which speaks a great deal about the events of Jesus’ last hours. When one follows the text however, we shift from a man who is distraught and weary to one whose hope and faith are in the LORD. Click here to read Psalm 22. That is exactly what was on the mind of the Messiah on the cross - not the current situation he was in - but the end of the story.

Hebrews 5:7-9 - “In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation”

Acts 10:38 - “You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him.

God did not forsake His son on the cross. God was with His son unto the end. And Jesus was obedient and devoted to his Father unto the end. And on the mind of the Messiah as he died for the sins of others, was this Psalm of praise and expectation of the LORD’s deliverance.

God Bless        

    So, about a week ago, I was sitting on a beach next to my wife and my parents. Beaches are wonderful, aren’t they? To sit there and feel the air, the sound of the waves and the sun beating down on you is almost surreal. You know what I’m talking about, that feeling that almost takes your breath away with its grandeur. By far, though, the most impressive thing is to look out on the horizon. It feels like the ocean is never ending, that this could wholly consume you, yet at the same time it is terrifying in all of its attributes.

            We all know this feeling that we get even though some of us may have never been to the beach. You all know that feeling? The same feeling that you get looking up to the sky and seeing the clouds and even the feeling you get when you see a gigantic fire -like a forest fire. A sort of feeling that takes your breath away. You stare at the skies’ vastness, the apparent never-ending blaze of flame, the idea that the ocean may never end; you get lost in its awful vastness. Yet, in a sense, it inspires some amount of reverence in us. We are almost sucked in by it.

            What if we could see God like that? What would change about us and the way we related to our creator?

            For the Israelites in the book of Exodus -the story of how God led the Israelites from their bondage in egypt into the land promised thousands of years in the past to Abraham- this wasn’t such a stretch.

            The bible tells us that God led the Israelites by a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. This presence of God was so much for the Israelites that they said to moses, “But do not have God speak to us or we will die.” [Exodus 20:19b]

            You see, that same feeling we may get when looking out into the ocean, looking up into the sky, or watching a fiery blaze, that’s the feeling the Israelites had when they looked up at God. They gazed into His incredible vastness and the only responses were awe, fear and reverence.

            We find out later, though that this was merely the tip of the iceberg. To see God and live was impossible, the infinite glory of God was just too much for a finite human being to stand. Up on the mount Sinai, Moses asked God to see Him. God tells Him that to gaze upon His face is death but He can see His hind-parts as His glory passes over Him. Through this, Moses gets a taste of this wonderful, infinite, yet scary power. As he comes down from the mountain, his face is glowing. Once we enter into the presence of God, we will never be the same.

            God, throughout the story of the bible and even in our own stories now, has desired to be with us. God desires a generation that seeks to explore the skies, a generation that gaze at the fire in wonder. A generation that seeks to achieve that which is really, truly real, the divine center, God.

            Fast-forward ahead to the time of Jesus. In John 4:23, Jesus says “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for these are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks.” The emphasis here is on the word “seeks.” While, in one sense, God wishes for people who seek to enter into his presence, but in another sense God is seeking after us. Like the father of the prodigal son, God is waiting on the porch and running out to meet us as we approach, like the lost sheep out of one-hundred, God leaves the other 99 and goes to find us.

            That takes us to the subject of our teachings for today and the next three weeks after. The series itself is called Of Yokes and Flame, as well as this particular sermon. I’d like us to think of this less as a sermon series, though, and more of a journey. Standing up here I do not claim to be a master of this subject, I can say, however, that I am wrestling with applying it to my life. The subject is the spiritual disciplines.

            Of course, when most of us hear those two words put together in a sentence that insinuates some sort of discussion about them a myriad of thoughts and inhibitions come to our minds. It seems that, in our American culture, even the word “discipline” causes us to bristle a little bit. We find that whenever those two words are put together the subject is usually something that we feel we cannot even achieve. The title of being “spiritual” is usually given to people who are now, in some capacity, known as saints. But connecting with God doesn’t have to be something that the ordinary Kyle Casey can’t achieve. Although it will take some discipline maybe a little bit of hard work and the knowledge of one crucial point we can embark on this journey together.

            What is that point, you ask? The point is that our spiritual discipline allows us to seek and be sought out by God. This language is similar to the language one experiences in a dating relationship or in any relationship for that matter. Every relationship is a two-way street. One party seeks and the other party reciprocates that is how any valid, worthwhile relationship is achieved. Our relationship with God is not an exception. I mentioned earlier that God seeks after us, He is compared with the father of a prodigal son running to meet him on the road, a shepherd who leaves his heard to find one lost sheep, and we also found that God seeks after true worshippers. Throughout the old testament, especially during the time after David and Solomon’s reign as kings in Israel God is constantly seeking a generation of people who will “act justly and…love mercy and…walk humbly with your God.” God desires a generation of people who will walk humbly with Him. So the goal of our spiritual discipline is to seek and be sought. I truly believe that if you leave this church with nothing but that one statement in your mind, you will find that your life with God will be amazingly fuller.

            What would it change in our lives with God if we could fully understand that fact? What would happen in this worship service if we understand that at this moment we are being sought by God? What would change about our demeanor when we enter this church? What if we could all understand that the human aspect of our spiritual discipline is simply to seek God with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our mind and with all our strength. That is the primary emphasis, but I want to latch on to the simplicity of this statement.

            You’re probably sitting there thinking that I am totally off of my rocker, spiritual discipline is supposed to be about striving, and you are true at some point. The point of a discipline is to work at something, like an athlete disciplines him or herself during training. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 9:25-27:

Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

The disciplines themselves are not easy and discipline in general is not easy. Just ask any parent of a teenage child (I haven’t been a parent, but I have been a teenage child, maybe a little more recently than some of you, and I remember the mental anguish I put my parents through). Discipline is tough, but fortunately for us, that’s where it ends. The point of discipline is putting yourself in a place where you can seek and where God can seek you, but you will never be able to “discipline” yourself into a relationship with God. Paul tells us in Colossians 2:20-23:

Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: “Do not Hand! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.

In the King James Version, it isn’t called “self-imposed worship” it is called “will worship”. In other words, if the only thing we rely on to cultivate a relationship with God is the things that we do we have created an idol out of ourselves. Our “doing” is not what achieves a relationship with God it is simply our “being”. This applies to the disciplines as well. The goal of a spiritual discipline is not for us to earn our way to a relationship with God as our divine center, rather it functions as a sort of middle-man to put us in a place where we are wholly seeking God and He is able to touch every aspect of our lives, to seek us. The goal of a spiritual discipline is to seek and be sought.In the King James Version, it isn’t called “self-imposed worship” it is called “will worship”. In other words, if the only thing we rely on to cultivate a relationship with God is the things that we do we have created an idol out of ourselves. Our “doing” is not what achieves a relationship with God it is simply our “being”. This applies to the disciplines as well. The goal of a spiritual discipline is not for us to earn our way to a relationship with God as our divine center, rather it functions as a sort of middle-man to put us in a place where we are wholly seeking God and He is able to touch every aspect of our lives, to seek us. The goal of a spiritual discipline is to seek and be sought.            This is why in one place Jesus can say that to follow Him we must take up our cross daily, but in another He can tell us that His yoke and the burden associated with it is light. As a matter of fact, it is this idea that this sermon gets part of its title. Let’s go there to  Matthew 11 verses 28 through 30:

In the King James Version, it isn’t called “self-imposed worship” it is called “will worship”. In other words, if the only thing we rely on to cultivate a relationship with God is the things that we do we have created an idol out of ourselves. Our “doing” is not what achieves a relationship with God it is simply our “being”. This applies to the disciplines as well. The goal of a spiritual discipline is not for us to earn our way to a relationship with God as our divine center, rather it functions as a sort of middle-man to put us in a place where we are wholly seeking God and He is able to touch every aspect of our lives, to seek us. The goal of a spiritual discipline is to seek and be sought.            This is why in one place Jesus can say that to follow Him we must take up our cross daily, but in another He can tell us that His yoke and the burden associated with it is light. As a matter of fact, it is this idea that this sermon gets part of its title. Let’s go there to  Matthew 11 verses 28 through 30:

Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.

Spiritual disciplines are not meant to burden you forever. Although taking up a discipline will burden at first, we find that the more we discipline ourselves the more freedom we have from our own bondage to ourselves. Our burdens are taken away. The burden to look good all the time. The slavery to our stomachs. The lust we may have. All, taken away. That must have been the point of Jesus telling us to take up our cross and follow Him. At first the burden may be hard, but freedom is found thereafter. After all, He does help us carry our burdens.Spiritual disciplines are not meant to burden you forever. Although taking up a discipline will burden at first, we find that the more we discipline ourselves the more freedom we have from our own bondage to ourselves. Our burdens are taken away. The burden to look good all the time. The slavery to our stomachs. The lust we may have. All, taken away. That must have been the point of Jesus telling us to take up our cross and follow Him. At first the burden may be hard, but freedom is found thereafter. After all, He does help us carry our burdens.            Again, the purpose of any spiritual discipline is to seek and be sought by God.

Spiritual disciplines are not meant to burden you forever. Although taking up a discipline will burden at first, we find that the more we discipline ourselves the more freedom we have from our own bondage to ourselves. Our burdens are taken away. The burden to look good all the time. The slavery to our stomachs. The lust we may have. All, taken away. That must have been the point of Jesus telling us to take up our cross and follow Him. At first the burden may be hard, but freedom is found thereafter. After all, He does help us carry our burdens.            Again, the purpose of any spiritual discipline is to seek and be sought by God.In the book The Sacred Way by Tony Jones, Abba Joseph of Panephysis recounts a story between two Abbas. The Abbas were the leaders of a monastic movement sometime in the fifth century that felt called by God to go into the desert to seek Him and place them in a place where they could be sought by them. The Abbas often took upon others as their mentors.

Abba Lot went to see Abba Joseph and said to Him, “Abba, as far as I can, I say my little office, I fast a little, I pray and meditate, I live in peace and as far as I can, I purify my thoughts. What else can I do?” The Old man stood up and stretched his hands toward heaven. His fingers became like ten lamps of fire and he said to him, “If you will, you can become all flame.”

This is where the other half of the sermon takes its name from. The phrase “if you will” doesn’t mean the type of will I was discouraging earlier, but rather a choice. Seeking after God is a choice after all. As a matter of fact, it was Abba Lot who was relying on his will to seek after God. He believed that doing was the end all. Abba Joseph showed him who really was in charge. By reaching his hands toward Heaven he showed who the power was obtained to. The fire comes from seeking God.This is where the other half of the sermon takes its name from. The phrase “if you will” doesn’t mean the type of will I was discouraging earlier, but rather a choice. Seeking after God is a choice after all. As a matter of fact, it was Abba Lot who was relying on his will to seek after God. He believed that doing was the end all. Abba Joseph showed him who really was in charge. By reaching his hands toward Heaven he showed who the power was obtained to. The fire comes from seeking God.            I would assume that Abba Joseph would say the same thing to us as well. We would come to him and say that we go to church, participate in worship and serve our congregations and he would tell us that if we chose to, we could be all flame. This is not to say that none of us have any flame, but to be totally consumed by that flame.

This is where the other half of the sermon takes its name from. The phrase “if you will” doesn’t mean the type of will I was discouraging earlier, but rather a choice. Seeking after God is a choice after all. As a matter of fact, it was Abba Lot who was relying on his will to seek after God. He believed that doing was the end all. Abba Joseph showed him who really was in charge. By reaching his hands toward Heaven he showed who the power was obtained to. The fire comes from seeking God.            I would assume that Abba Joseph would say the same thing to us as well. We would come to him and say that we go to church, participate in worship and serve our congregations and he would tell us that if we chose to, we could be all flame. This is not to say that none of us have any flame, but to be totally consumed by that flame.            That is the challenge for today. Can we begin to be consumed by God? Perhaps you are out there and have no desire for this sort of an encounter. Perhaps then you an pray for the desire to desire to be wholly consumed by God. We need to remember that the goal of all of our disciplines is to seek God and be sought in return.

When I first started listening to the debate I thought Michael Bugg was going to present a classic trinitarian case for the deity of Jesus. However, after listening to the whole thing, I’m not sure Mr. Bugg would be considered a trinitarian by any standard. His primary emphasis in this debate was that Jesus is the “shechinah” of the Father. The analogy he refers to over and over is that the Father is like the brain and Jesus is like the hand. The brain communicates to the hand and the hand sends communication back to the brain, but it is one human. Quite honestly, this analogy sounded like modalism to me, but Mr. Bugg repeatedly denied that he was a modalist. (A modalist is one who believes that God showed up in different modes (as Father, then as Son, then as holy spirit) and that there is really only one person who is God).

Much of the debate centered on whether or not Jesus pre-existed or not. Mr. Janzen gave the same types of explanations we would give here to the typical verses that always come up in this type of conversation.

An interesting feature of the debate was that it occurred in twenty minute speeches all throughout. Rather than having an opening statement followed by a couple of rebuttals, every speech was twenty minutes (at least until the question and answer time).

Here is the mp3 of the first night
Here is the mp3 of the second night

Both participants were gentleman and conducted themselves in a Christian manner. Furthermore, Mr. Bugg said the second night that this is not a salvation issue for him–he believes that Mr. Janzen is saved even though he does not believe that Jesus is deity. I’m not sure if it was because of Mr. Janzen’s thick Georgia accent or because of the Christlike spirit with which he spoke, but he was a real model of gentleness and grace throughout the debate. May we all learn to disagree with such dignity and kindness.

C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2001), p. 52.
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

When I read this paragraph I had two contrary emotions rush through my mind. On the one hand, I was delighted to see his argument against taking Jesus to be a nice moral person, because anyone who has read the Gospels knows that Jesus was extremely controversial in his own time and required either absolute commitment (to the point of death) from his followers or else they would end up with the same fate as the rest of the world. At the same time I was feeling appreciation for the anti-patronizing sentiment in this paragraph, I was also alarmed to see that I only had three categories in which to put Jesus of Nazareth: (1) God, (2) a liar, or (3) a madman.

This same strategy of arguing for Jesus’ divinity is still being used by many Christians today. Josh McDowell in his chapter “Significance of Deity: The Trilemma—Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?” narrows the options through the use of a flow chart. At the top is the statement, “Jesus claims to be God” followed by the title, “two alternatives.” Either his claims were false and he was lying or sincerely deluded OR his claims are true and he is God.

“And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”” (Matthew 16.14-16)

Where is the category “God” or “God the Son” in this confession? Even with all of his miracles and authoritative statements, no one thought Jesus was anything other than a genuine human being on the order of John the Baptist, Elijah, and Jeremiah. Simon’s confession is that Jesus is the human messiah, the long awaited Davidic ruler, the Son of God. “Son of God” does not imply deity, it is a title conferred upon the Davidic king (2 Sam. 7.14; Ps. 2.7). Even trinitarian scholars know that Son of God has nothing to do with being God. John Howard Yoder writes,

John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), pp. 24-25.
“‘Son of God’ cannot very well in Aramaic have pointed to the ontological coessentiality of the Son with the Father…The ‘Son of God’ in Psalm 2:7 is the King; all the options laid before Jesus [in his temptation in the wilderness] by the tempter [Satan] are ways of being king…the title is meant messianically and not metaphysically…Luke 22:76-23:31 equates ‘Messiah’ and ‘Son of God’ with ‘King of the Jews.’ All three titles in standard usage referred not to incarnate deity but to a divinely mandated royal man.”

So, Jesus is not God as a man but a God empowered man who was anointed to be the King of the Jews—the Messiah. Furthermore, in the case of Jesus, there is a dual meaning to the title “Son of God” because God had begotten him in the womb of his mother via the holy spirit. Luke is explicit:

The angel answered and said to her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy child shall be called the Son of God.’” (Lk 1.35)

Jesus is the Son of God precisely because of the miracle in the womb of his mother—because God begat him. To assert that “Son of God” equals “God the Son” is to anachronistically read later theology into the historical accounts. Nevertheless, very famous Christian radio preachers like Chuck Swindoll, chancellor of Dallas Theological Seminary, continue to assert that “Son of God” equals “God.” Consider this excerpt from his book, Jesus:

Charles R. Swindoll, Jesus: The Greatest Life of All, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2008), p. 12.
“No one dared call himself a son of God, or he would be guilty of blasphemy. Only someone having God’s divine qualities and powers, and possessing God’s ruling authority, could call himself “the Son of God.” And for Peter to give Jesus this title meant that Jesus was a worthy object of worship, just like the God faithful Jews had worshiped in the temple for centuries. Jesus didn’t object. He praised Peter…Yes! You’ve got it! This is a supernatural insight you have received from heaven. I am in fact deity. Who is this man? If we are to believe the man himself, He is God.”

Incredible! Peter was not confessing that Jesus was the Messiah and God! He was confessing that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. Perhaps Dr. Swindoll has overlooked the fact that Adam was called the son of God (Luke 3.38)? Or perhaps he has not noticed several texts in which the titles “Christ” and “Son of God” are used interchangeably? Consider the following instances:

“But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest said to Him, ‘I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God.’” (Matthew 26.63)

“Demons also were coming out of many, shouting, “You are the Son of God!” But rebuking them, He would not allow them to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ.” (Luke 4.41)

“Nathanael answered Him, ‘Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.’” (John 1.49)

“She said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world.’” (John 11.27)

“But these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.” (John 20.31)

Jesus is the Son of God, the Christ, the King of Israel, the one destined to rule on the throne of David (Lk 1.31-33) but these titles do not imply deity. Rather, they imply that God has anointed his man to be king, and not just over Israel, but over the whole world in the coming kingdom of God. So the next time someone says, “Is Jesus God, a liar, or a madman,” we can simply reply, “You are forgetting something, sir. What about the biblical idea that Jesus is the human Messiah, the second Adam, the Son of God destined to rule the world as God’s agent of reconciliation, justice, and peace?” We need to be people of the book, those who ground our understanding of Christ in Scripture rather than what popular books, radio shows, or TV shows teach. The only way to find truth about Jesus is to fearlessly, relentlessly, and prayerfully search the Scriptures.

The God of Thomas?

There is another very serious problem with Thomas’ alleged confession. If the traditional understanding of this passage is true, then Thomas is guilty not only of confessing a God different from the God revealed in the Hebrew scriptures, but of confessing a God different from the one worshipped by Trinitarians as well. For the God Thomas allegedly confesses is not the three in one God of the Trinitarians; neither is He “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 1:17).

If Thomas truly intended for his words to be a confession of what he believed about God, his confession is dangerously deficient; for in reaching out to embrace his new God, Jesus Christ, Thomas seemingly let go of his old God, the God and Father of Jesus Christ. The Father is explicitly omitted from Thomas’ confession.

However, Thomas may not have meant to let go of the Father in his confession. There are at least two ways in which Thomas’ new confession could be reconciled with his old beliefs concerning who God is:

• He could have meant that he believed that Jesus was God in addition to the Father; or
• He could have meant that he believed that Jesus WAS God the Father.

Either way, his statement is divorced both from the strict unitarianism of the Hebrew scriptures (and of the rest of the Bible) and from traditional Trinitarianism. In place of these, Thomas has become, if proponents of Thomas’ words as a confession are to be believed, either a polytheist or a modalist. Both of these teachings are branded today as lies by traditional Trinitarians. The traditional interpretation of this passage, then, implies that Jesus put his blessing on what is today considered a lie, without so much as a qualifying remark or a correction to keep people out of the same trap that Thomas had supposedly fallen into.

It is argued by some that Thomas, when he came face to face with the risen Christ, finally believed what Jesus had been teaching all along about God and about himself. There are two serious problems with this argument. First, Jesus never once called himself God, or taught that he himself was God. Thus, in making this confession, Thomas was going well beyond the teaching and guidance of his master, into uncharted spiritual waters. Second, Jesus was very explicit and consistent in referring to his Father — and ONLY his Father! — as God.

A good example of Jesus’ teaching on himself and God is his conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well.

John 4:22-26

22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.

25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am [he].

Jesus told this woman that the time would come when “the true worshippers shall worship the Father…” He omitted both himself and “God the Holy Spirit” from the list of who was to be worshipped by “the true worshippers.” He did not say that they would worship “God,” which today would be considered ambiguous; he specifically limited their worship to “the Father.”

What did he teach this woman about himself? When she spoke of her hope concerning the Messiah, Jesus made it clear that he was the Messiah she was waiting for. The woman believed this, and that was enough for Jesus. He made no claims of being God to her. By today’s standards, his teaching in this case would be considered dangerously incomplete at best, and dishonest at worst.

But what is even more important for us concerning Jesus’ teaching about God is that Jesus never once indicated that God is made up of more than one being. What this means is that if Thomas were truly confessing Jesus as God, he could not have been doing so in a Binitarian (two in one) or Trinitarian sense. He would have to be confessing that Jesus was either a second God alongside the Father, or that Jesus was God in place of God the Father, or that God the Father was appearing on earth in a special guest role as Jesus Christ. All three of these possibilities are considered heretical by Trinitarians today.

The God of Thomas and the God of Jesus

While the alleged confession of Jesus Christ as God by Thomas is often noted, the confession by Jesus Christ of a completely different God — in the very same passage of scripture! — is rarely mentioned. Since the Gods confessed by Thomas and Jesus are so radically different, it might be worthwhile to compare the characteristics of the two. So, with sincere apologies to the apostle Thomas (who I firmly believe is completely innocent of the charges leveled against him by sincere and well-meaning Christians), let us compare the God confessed by Thomas with the God confessed by Jesus.

• The God of Thomas is Jesus.
• The God of Jesus is the Father.

• The God of Thomas is the head of every man.
• The God of Jesus is the head of Christ.

• The God of Thomas died and rose from the dead.
• The God of Jesus alone has immortality.

• The God of Thomas was in all ways tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
• The God of Jesus cannot be tempted with evil.

• The God of Thomas gave gifts unto men.
• The God of Jesus gave him the gifts that he gave unto men.

• The God of Thomas gives revelation to men.
• The God of Jesus gives him revelation, which he can then give to men.

• The God of Thomas is seated at the right hand of his Father now, and will one day sit on his throne on earth.
• The throne of the God of Jesus is heaven.

• The God of Thomas once consisted of a single cell in his mother’s womb.
• The heaven of heavens cannot contain the God of Jesus.

• The God of Thomas always does his Father’s will.
• The God of Jesus does all things after the counsel of His Own will.

• The God of Thomas is the Word of God.
• The God of Jesus is the Author of the Word of God.

Whose God is the true God: the God of Thomas, or the God of Jesus?

John 17:3

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

His message centers on love–not merely being nice to people while distancing oneself, but really learning to live a life of love with those who are suffering the most in the world. What would the world be like if we all did this? Was Jesus serious when he said that when we love the hungry, the naked, the imprisoned, the sick, we are doing it to him? Here is his message, I trust you will find it thought-provoking and challenging. Total length is 51 minutes.