whoever believes in me

-
The Church I used to attend

Have you ever asked—possibly even prayed—“what must I do to do the works God requires?” According to John’s gospel narrative, Jesus has just been teaching the crowd, a crowd containing seekers, agitators, adversaries and friends: a motley crew. I’m not sure how such a crowd can ask a question, but John seems to condense the predominant sentiments in “the crowd” with two questions, actually. The first is, “What do we have to do to please God?” and a second, “What miracles are you going to do to prove that you speak for God?

 John 6:28-35 New International Version (NIV)

28 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to.”
30 So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”
32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
34 “Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.”
35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
His answer—as is so often the case—isn’t really an answer to the question at all. How can “believe in the one he has sent” be thought of as “work?” It suggests to me that God’s expectations of us are not that complicated: exercising confidence in the path Jesus has just taught represents its totality. Isn’t that the essence of what it means to be an active Christian? Isn’t believing in pretty much the same as trusting? And doesn't our behaviour reflect what we trust, have confidence in? And isn’t living in the light of that trust a natural outcome of “having fed on the bread that is Jesus?”

But the crowd doesn’t get what “believing in” really means. They’re stuck on “believing” and “believing” can only be expected if there’s a “proving.” Will Jesus do something like, say, produce manna from heaven like God did for the Children of Israel in the wilderness? If he would—the implication seems to be—then they would believe his claims. And not until. (The irony in citing the manna miracle seems to be lost on them; five-thousand of them have just been fed with a few loaves and fishes!) 

Seems to me we’re living—as the broad Christian community—the legacy of the crowd, and neglecting the “bread of life” legacy. We’re all about “proving” as the cornerstone of faith: proving that homosexuality is wrong or not, proving that baptism isn’t for children, proving that bearing arms is or isn’t justified, proving that the “being born again” formula is the heavenly test. And it’s in the believing or not-believing of such matters that we miss the point: “For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

The believing/proving paradigm sucks the life out of our world, not what God through Jesus intended. It’s the crowd mentality that has resulted in the unbelievable splitting of “believers” into myriad denominations: those who believe that baptism is just for adults, those who believe that it makes a difference to God whether the Sabbath is Sunday or Saturday, those who can prove that there’s a time when killing (the opposite of “giving life”) is justifiable, etc., etc.
If pressed, I would have to admit that I don’t “believe” that Jesus literally turned barrels of water into wine. but I totally “believe in” the principle it illustrates: that the Jesus-way (bread) can elevate us to heights (life) that is a lot like “water is to wine.” Whether you believe it literally or figuratively is a crowd question; it doesn’t belong in the “believe in me” conversation. 

In everything that matters, we’re probably on the same page.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Democracy or bust

-
Image
  Politics . You can tell how people relate to this word by the way they use it. “I’m not much interested in politics,” for instance, equates it with the day-to-day news about our current government, elections, party dynamics, etc. A narrow definition.                By whatever word we use, it’s clear that the setting and enforcing of the principles under which we form community—and function as community—existed before the word was coined. In families, in schools, in workplaces, on the roads, in the economy, the making and respecting of agreed-to behavioural expectations in a community is the necessary defense against chaos.                How behavioural expectations come to be, how they are altered, how they are enforced … and most importantly by whose authority … is fundamental. The “benevolent dictator” model has a long history: give...
Read more

Do I dare eat a peach?

-
Image
  All the talk of Joe Biden’s unfitness for the position of president of the USA must have others of his age—80 plus—wondering about their own fitness. Most of us octogenarians are well aware of our physical limitations, I think, but mentally? How can I know, for instance, if the lines I’m writing are logically sound, or if they fall somewhere between inane and gibberish? How can I know if my diminished capacity can be trusted to make such a judgment? And what if my friends are too kind to tell me when to close my laptop? Hearing an aging loved one tell the same stories to the same people every day has the able-minded nodding knowingly and cluckingly (that’s a word, isn’t it?). We’re obviously too kind and too hip not to know that people experiencing obvious dementia deserve to be “handled with care,” and we’ve devised places and strategies to preserve for them whatever dignity is still possible. But it’s not dissimilar from the pain-relieving, ointment applying, chair-exercisin...
Read more

Stories We Live By

-
Image
  David Brooks, writer, philosopher and journalist, said in a recent speech to the Aspen Ideas gathering that the current divisive, belligerent mood among the people of earth can’t be attributed to our real-life situations. We have space, food, water, shelter, healthcare enough for everyone, and more. We don’t fight because we need to, he said, but because we carry stories in our heads to which we respond. It's clear that he doesn’t mean story in the same way I meant it when I published a collection of short stories , but there’s something to be gained in connecting the two, particularly when behaviour is guided by, for instance, The Holy Bible , or the Quran , each telling a story by which adherents understand life and by which their actions are governed. Scientists, as a rule, act according to a very different story of life, their exploration guided very much by the saga of evolving nature and the incontrovertible principles that govern all things. Our stories —I think Broo...
Read more