This must have felt frustrating; Jesus has already explained to them all and then added more to help Thomas. But now Philip doesn’t understand either. But Jesus is able to cope with anything, and in this he leads the way for us; frustration doesn’t lead to impatience. We are called to be patient as he is patient.
Philip asks Jesus to show the Father to the puzzled, anxious disciples, and he adds that doing so will satisfy them. Jesus is surprised. I’ve been with you all this time, Philip: how can you not know me?
Simple truth
And he explains again the simple truth that he and his Father are one, ‘I’m in the Father, and he’s in me’. This simple truth is hard for Philip to grasp because it is so deep, so astonishing, yet so simple. Surely far too simple to be true, and far too shocking as well. Nobody has ever made claims like this before! It is either true, or Jesus is utterly deluded, or at worst he’s a complete fraud. No wonder Philip struggles! Jesus tells him that if he can’t believe what he says, he should certainly believe what he’s been doing – healing the sick, raising the dead, forgiving the guilty. Who else but the Father himself could do this stuff?
The Father’s glory
If you believe in me you’ll do even greater things because, when I’m in the Father’s presence, you’ll be able to ask whatever is needed and I’ll do it for you. Why? Because the Father’s glory (the Presence that has long been in the holiest place in the Temple) will instead be in Jesus and his glory will no longer be contained in the Holy of Holies but will be contained in Jesus instead. And although Jesus doesn’t say so here, the Father’s glory will therefore be in the church because we, the church, are Jesus’ body here in the world. Perhaps this is not fully understood or expressed until the Holy Spirit reveals it to Paul on the Damascus road. Paul knew that the Presence had been in the Holy Place, but that now there was a new Holy Place, the church, inhabited by the Son, and through him, by the Father too since they are one. Although this was plain to Paul even before the Temple’s destruction, it must have been far less clear to the disciples while Jesus was still physically with them.
We carry an inestimable treasure with us wherever we go! And if that doesn’t fill you with hope, joy, and encouragement, I don’t know what will.
The message from the New Testament seemed clear to me, there was supposed to be just one church, not a multiplicity of flavours brought about through a long series of historical disagreements and splits.
I was asked this question some time ago, and at first I felt that it somehow missed the point because I tend to feel that I never was an Anglican. But it’s true that in my mid to late teens I would have called myself Anglican – perhaps.
My parents were Anglicans in the limited sense that they were not Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Salvation Army or anything else. Dad was quite dedicated, jotting brief prayers in his diary and during parts of his life often attending communion at the parish church. I doubt that he made a conscious decision on this, it was just taken for granted, it had been the family tradition as far back as anyone knew. Mum was different, she was used to village life in Northern Ireland and taught Sunday school at the tiny village church, a simple and plain structure. She was uncomfortable with anything remotely high church, but if you’d asked her what she was she might have said Anglican, or Church of Ireland, or just Christian.
I was Christened when I was little and was encouraged to read the Bible as a child, at home, but more so at junior school and later in RE lessons at secondary school. By the age of 13 I was familiar with the outline contents of the Old and New Testaments, and with many of the stories recorded there. In my teens I was expected to attend confirmation classes and went along out of obedience rather than a desire to be there. In due course I was confirmed, though it didn’t mean much to me and life continued as before. I had not yet begun to grapple with what I did and did not believe.
As I went through the processes of sitting my O levels and A levels and applying for a place at university, I began to form my own ideas about faith. I was intrigued by the Bible and began to take what I read there quite seriously. And I didn’t see much there to support Anglicanism or, indeed, denominations of any kind. The message from the New Testament seemed clear to me, there was supposed to be just one church, not a multiplicity of flavours brought about through a long series of historical disagreements and splits. And what about the many stories of healings, and the parables about how we should live, and the Pauline teachings about gifts of the Spirit, and the letters to churches in the Greek world of the time? I was taking all of this seriously, but saw little evidence that the denominations were doing the same. I explored more widely, visiting the Jehovah’s Witnesses, signing up for a Christadelphian magazine, reading books about the Mormons and Christian Science, but none of these avenues seemed to make much sense to me.
After graduating from university, getting married, and starting full time jobs, Judy and I spent our Sundays in Bristol doing some serious denominational exploration. We went to Sunday services at every church we could find, and never once had a sense of, ‘This is the one!’. We were searching, but not finding.
Zetland Evangelical Church in 2002
In the end, in utter desperation, we tried a weird place just down the road from our flat. In some ways it seemed more odd than any of the other places we’d tried. It had a large sign above the door in blue and gold reading ‘God is Love’, and didn’t look like a church building, more like a large house. This was Zetland Evangelical Church in Bristol, near the railway arches over the Cheltenham Road. We found to our surprise that we were instantly at home! The people there wanted to talk with us, and they shared some of our own thoughts about what we’d been reading in the Bible. We felt welcomed – as if by a large family. We’d found a real community, which is what we’d long hoped for. Not only that, when I went to a mid-week evening meeting I was blown away by teaching about David, perhaps from 2 Samuel, and a section I was familiar with. The fresh insights and explanations were very striking, here were people who knew their topic – and it all made perfect sense.
We still felt there was more, and we were joining one of those denominational ‘splinter groups’ that so perplexed us. But this was by far the best thing yet. At this point in our lives we would not have settled for Anglican or any other church tradition. We were particularly encouraged by the fact that there was no hierarchy at Zetland, there was no single leader, we were all equal, or so it appeared. There was no liturgy, no pastor, and once a month there was a delightful Sunday morning Open Meeting with nobody at the front and where all could contribute a prayer, a hymn, or some teaching. All, that is, except women and children. This was one of several niggling issues that we put to the back of our minds for the time being.
Eventually we discovered much more – but that’s another story.
Explanatory note – Please don’t think that I’m judging or disapproving of denominations and those who are involved with them. In this short article I’m describing how a much younger Chris Jefferies understood things. I have many non-denominational friends, but also friends from New Frontiers, Anglican, and particularly Baptist traditions. Particularly Baptist simply because at the time of writing I take part in a small home group that meets weekly and is part of Cirencester Baptist Church. I’m not a Baptist, I will not (cannot) become a church member. We are all part of one family, the family of those who follow Jesus. We are all brothers and sisters and we have individual perspectives and expressions of what that means. I honour and love each one as part of an undivided whole.
Sometimes we struggle because we know we’re at a place of final defeat. Yet beyond that defeat, hope can still spring up.
Sarah Reynolds is a talented singer and musician in the Cirencester area and has written, performed, mixed and produced several of her own songs. A little while ago her latest song, Wilderness, was released and I’d like to share it with you. Here’s the version with lyrics.
So – What is special about Wilderness and why do I love the song? For me, Sarah manages to capture both the anxiety and the struggle of seeming failure, but also the hope and expectation of redemption. Sometimes we struggle because we know we’re at a place of final defeat. Yet beyond that defeat, hope can still spring up – sometimes unexpectedly.
This is surely an experience we’ve all had – I’ve been at the end of my tether but finally realised the way forward depends, not on my ability and strength, but on an external source of help. So have you! We’ve all felt this way from time to time.
So this song’s emotional engagement comes from reminding us that there’s defeat within us, yet ‘hope springs eternal’ from elsewhere.
If it’s wide and deep vision that you are looking for … then read this book
I don’t often write about books here on JHM. But I just have to tell you about 5Q.
If it’s wide and deep vision that you are looking for, a penetrating gaze into the truth written with passion and humility, then read this book; you will not be disappointed. It’s a book for everyone who is serious in following Jesus. 5Q will challenge you, encourage you, and maybe shock you, but it will also illuminate your thinking and understanding.
5Q is a book by one of my favourite authors, Alan Hirsch. In it, he examines church as commonly understood in the West, and challenges his readers to look at it with fresh and inquisitive eyes. For many years now, Alan has been accumulating knowledge and experience about the way we tend to do church, and sharing his thoughts on what fundamental changes are needed. He has delved deep into both theology and practice, he’s written and taught extensively about the understandings he has developed. And it’s not merely theoretical stuff, much of it is good, practical guidance and advice.
5Q is based on frameworks Alan has described before, namely his ideas around the APEST gifts to the church described by Paul in Ephesians 4. These are the gifts of apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers. But he has gone much further in the grand synthesis that is 5Q; his excitement and passion shine out on every page.
Watching ‘The Shack’ was an emotional experience, it had me on the edge of tears a number of times.
Paul Young’s extraordinary book, The Shack, came out in 2007. I read it at the time and was so impressed that I shared it widely amongst my friends and family. A film based on the book was released in March in the USA, but here in the UK we had to wait until June.
Donna and I went to see it in Cheltenham on 10th and thought it was very true to the book. In some ways it’s better than the book! Watching ‘The Shack’ was an emotional experience, it had me on the edge of tears a number of times, and I mentioned the book and the film on Thursday when I met with some friends from Cirencester Baptist Church. One of the people in that meeting, Miriam, told us about an online video she had seen in which the author is interviewed by Nicky Gumbel. This is just one of many interviews out there, my three particular favourites are below, Paul Young has collected others on his own website, and Google will find more with the author, and with the actors in the film,
Whatever your views on faith, discipleship, mission, community or the nature of church, this book will encourage you to fresh thinking.
Ten years ago a significant book was written by a guy called Alan Hirsch. He titled it ‘The Forgotten Ways’ and in it he laid out his thinking about a new paradigm to explain the rapid flourishing of movements such as the early church.
A few days ago a new edition appeared with significant changes following ten further years of thinking about explosive missional movements. Alan has refined the book by adding new examples, making some changes to the terms he uses, and making even more persuasive arguments.
The new version is a great book; read it! Whatever your views on faith, discipleship, mission, community or the nature of church, this book will encourage you to fresh thinking. It will take you down some rarely travelled roads, through unexplored countryside, and it will open new vistas and opportunities.
There are a few links below, you might explore these if you are new to Alan’s thinking. And if you’re familiar with the first edition you’ll certainly want to read the new one.
The twenty-first century is turning out to be a highly complex phenomenon where terrorism, disruptive technological innovation, environmental crisis, rampant consumerism, discontinuous change, and perilous ideologies confront us at every point. In the face of this upheaval, even the most confident among us would have to admit, in our more honest moments, that the church as we know it faces a very significant adaptive challenge.
He’s absolutely right! But what can we do about it? A very plausible answer will unfold as you read this book.
If the Universe was brought into being by a deliberate creative act, then the nature of of the Creator will have left its stamp on what he made.
There’s a big question out there, and it’s a question many are afraid to ask. Is scientific knowledge subject to faith, or is faith subject to knowledge? I put the question that way because not everyone seems to think they are compatible, let alone complementary.
Putting faith ahead of knowledge results in claims that evolution is false because it runs counter to the teaching of the Bible. And we can replace ‘evolution’ in that statement with ‘cosmology’, ‘geology’ and other scientific disciplines. But starting with scientific knowledge also results in difficulties, some scientists claim that atheism is an essential conclusion and there is no need to think in terms of a Creator.
Instead, let’s accept that there are organisations like the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion in Cambridge, England that represent the views of many scientists who are also Christians. The two need not be in opposition at all. What follows is my own, personal view and perhaps a way forward.
The Universe tells us about the Creator – Let’s begin by considering that if the Universe was brought into being by a deliberate creative act, then the nature of of the Creator will have left its stamp on what he made. It’s easy to see this is true for creative people. Whether we consider prose, poetry, painting, film directing, musical composition, musical performance, photography, architecture or design of physical products, we can often identify the person behind the work because their personality and style are there for all to see. Most of us could look at three paintings, one by Renoir, one by Constable and one by Picasso, and immediately say which artist created which work. A skilled and experienced art critic could make far finer judgements, not only about an artist’s identity but probably his approximate age at the time the work was produced.
In the same way, Papa’s hand and style are very much present in what he has made. For example, the Universe contains many events that are random and unpredictable. Given twenty atoms of a radioactive isotope, nobody can tell in advance the sequence in which those atoms will decay. But the Universe also follows patterns or rules. If we know which isotope we are dealing with we can predict roughly how long it will take for ten to decay, and that it will be about the same amount of time again until there are only five remaining. The Universe is full of unpredictability on the one hand and predictability on the other. It has rules, yet chance events play an important role as well.
Science is the best way we have of discovering the rules that govern our Universe. Maths and science also allow us to understand the uncertainties it contains.So people who believe in a Creator (as I do) can conclude that he uses both randomness and rules to build the natural world and either finds them useful features or perhaps even essential. So surely we should use science to better understand the nature of the One who is behind everything. Alongside all of this, the Bible brings information about his spiritual nature – that he is holy, invisible, powerful, omnipresent. And above all, the Bible tells us that he is defined primarily by his love.
Faith and knowledge – I hope you will agree that if we are to fully appreciate and understand the Almighty, we must draw from both faith and knowledge. Our understanding of the Universe does not depend on the Bible, it depends on what we see all around us. And our understanding of the Bible doesn’t depend on our understanding of the Universe, but on a hard-to-define spiritual awareness that is available to everyone who will search for it.
There are two potential errors here for the unwary; both are serious and both are common.
We should not try to predetermine what the Universe will tell us by studying the Bible.
We should not limit the spiritual truth of the Bible by invoking science.
For the fullest understanding of the nature of the the Almighty (and of ourselves), we must draw from the Bible for spiritual truth and from science for physical truth.
Essential kenosis – A recent book by Thomas Jay Oord explores the Creator’s nature in depth and is well-argued and very readable. If you want to go deeper with this topic I heartily recommend his work, ‘The Uncontrolling Love of God‘. He argues strongly for what he calls ‘essential kenosis’, and the idea that love is Papa’s most fundamental characteristic while his power comes second. And this explains a lot about pain and suffering, evil, and Father’s apparent inability or unwillingness to prevent bad things happening.
