The title of my talk would, I think, be "A Fresh Hearing of the Gospels." Over the years I heard a story, or different stories, over and over again, that all seemed to be about the same topic. I'm not sure whether they were different versions of the same story, or different stories, with the same point, but the story, or stories, was something like this: A young man, who had no knowledge of the Christian faith at all, was in college, and one day, having nothing much else to do, he picked up from the bedside table of his roommate a copy of the Gospels and read them. Before he had finished the gospels he was a believing Christian. Now whether that story is true, or not, I don't know. Whether it happened once or many times, I don't know. I sought to find somebody's biography or autobiography that cited a story like that, and I haven't been able to do so. So if any of you know where a citation is given to find it somewhere, I would appreciate it, and it would save me a good deal of research time. But the story made me wonder then, and makes me wonder now, what would it be like if we could hear the Gospels for the first time. What would it be like if we could hear the Gospel story without any of those overlays, or those films, that obscure and blunt and dull. You know, the overlays of a few things remembered from Sunday school classes, and a few half-remembered bits of sermons, and a few half-forgotten lectures. Plus an overlay of many ecclesiastical debates about this point and that point, and so on; all of which obscure, film, blunt the impact of the Gospels. What would it be like? I have sought to find, as I said, some record somewhere, some description of this happening to somebody. I did find something like this ... some of you will remember Samuel Isaac Joseph Schereschewsky, who was the Bishop of Shanghai in the late nineteenth century and translated the bible into Japanese, one of the heroes of our Anglican communion. He who was born of Jewish parents in Lithuania, and indeed his early education was studying for the rabbinate. But then while he was doing graduate studies in Germany he was contacted by the London Society for Promoting Christianity Among the Jews, and they gave him a copy of the New Testament in a Hebrew translation. And it was from reading this Hebrew translation of the New Testament that he was converted, became a Christian, and eventually the famous and saintly Bishop of Shanghai and translator of the Gospels. That's not quite the same as the story, but it's somewhat like it.
One other example that gets near it, but doesn't really quite hit it, is the present Archbishop of the Southern Cone of whom this is said: he came to a personal faith as a schoolboy in England through reading St. John's gospel when, to use his words, "Jesus walked out of the pages." I love those words, "When Jesus walked out of the pages." How marvelous if that could happen for us. If we could hear the Gospels afresh. What are they saying? Now that is not really possible for us. There are too many layers of film; that's not possible, but let's try. So what I would ask you to do with me this afternoon for a little bit is to make the attempt to let the Gospels speak afresh.
Let's begin at the beginning. In St. Mark's Gospel, which is the shortest one, and probably the earliest one, the story begins this way: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God. John the Baptizer appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Now John was clothed with camel's hair, and a leather girdle around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey". This may seem at first to be a very mundane introduction to this story, just a little bit of historical information. It was after John the Baptist that Jesus appeared, making just a little bit of history, like St. Luke saying, "In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar ...". Well come to a stop and look a bit. It's a lot more than just a bit of history. It's a bit, and quite a bit, of theology. For Josephus and the rabbis all claimed that prophecy had ceased with Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. Today, one of the new fads in Christianity-you see they go through a whole series of them-one of the new fads is "Ah, prophecy is glorious". Whenever you get a description for the election of a bishop, one of the things you have to have in the profile is "prophetic". And there is a hangover in scholarship that in the Old Testament the prophets were good and faithful, but the priesthood, was bad. Well, not really. Not quite that simple, for Zephaniah says, "Her prophets are wanton, faithless men; her priests profane what is sacred and do violence to the law." The priesthood can become corrupt, but the Old Testament would suggest prophets can be too. So "prophetic" is not necessarily good. But even more than that there's Zechariah, chapter 13, "If anyone again appears as a prophet, his father and mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies. On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies; he will not put on a hairy mantle in order to deceive." Not only were there no prophets, but if your son claims to be a prophet, it is your job, as a good, faithful father and mother, to pierce him. No prophets. No prophet until the messianic age begins. What is St. Mark saying? John the baptizer appeared, and what he's like. Clothed in camel's hair. That hairy mantle ensured that his parents should have disposed of him. Instead of which, there he is. So what seems to be simply an historical note, is more of a theological note. If John be indeed a prophet, then something is beginning to happen. Something of frightful importance is beginning to happen. If the messianic age is dawning, then isn't it time to start preparing the ground for him? We are supported in this understanding because, later on, in chapter 11 of St. Mark, the chief priests, the scribes and the elders came to Jesus, and they said, "By what authority are you doing these things?" "Who gave you this authority to do them?" And Jesus said, "I'll ask you a question. Answer me, and I'll tell you by what authority I do these things. Was the baptism of John from heaven or from man? Answer me". And, well, if they say "From heaven" then he's going to ask, "Why don't you believe him then?" "If they say, 'Just from men', well the crowd believe John's a prophet, so they really don't want to say that". And so they say to Jesus, "Well, we really don't know", and he says, "Well, OK, I won't answer your question". Now he's not just being clever. He's not just evading a difficult question. Rather his question to them has a point. If John be indeed a prophet, then what's happening? So this introduction to St. Mark's gospel, which seems at first such an innocuous, quiet kind of thing, is really, in its own way, as demanding, as challenging, as when Matthew and Luke describe a virginal conception, or when St. John says, "The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us". John the Baptizer appeared. What does it mean? What's going on? It's a stage of messianic expectation, and it is onto this stage that Jesus steps, and his ministry begins.
The next thing I would like to point out is that when the ministry of Jesus begins, the whole first seven chapters of the Gospel are very much of a piece. Everything Jesus does, and everything He says, tends to arouse questions, tends to make his listeners, whether they become believers or whether they become his enemies, start asking questions: Who is he? What is he? What does all of this mean? It is most clear in reports of the miracles of Jesus. You remember the stilling of the storm, which ends with the disciples saying, "Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey him?" But my point is that it's not just the miracles of Jesus that raise that question; the non-miraculous deeds of Jesus raise the same question. The teaching of Jesus raises the same question. The parables of Jesus raise the same question. All those parts of the Gospel are all doing the same thing.
The first part of the Gospel is a kind of a mystery story. A mystery - who is He? What is He? What is going on? For example, the miracles of Jesus, let's start with them. Now it's unfortunately very easy for us to say, "Oh well, miracles. I have trouble with that, you know, it seems to interfere with science, and scientific understanding, and so I'll dismiss them from my scrutiny and not think about them any more. But let's not be quite so quick. Whether you believe in miracles or don't, or explain them away, or whatever it may be, before we put them aside, let's look at them. Because, after all, the miracle stories make up a significant part of the Gospel. In the whole of St. Mark's Gospel about 31%. In the first chapters of Mark, out of 425 verses, 200 of them deal with miracles. So you see this is a pretty good-sized chunk. So before we dismiss them, let's look at them. The fact that there's so much doesn't prove that they're true, but it does say, "Let's look at them". What are they saying? The most important thing to see is that in the Gospel stories the real debate isn't whether these things happened, and were they things that for people in that age were viewed as miraculous. That's not the point. The real point is, what do they mean? Everybody assumed they happened. The argument was, what do they mean? In the third chapter of Mark, "The scribes that came down from Jerusalem said, 'He's possessed of Beelzebub, and by the prince of the demons he casts out demons'". And Jesus replies, "How can Satan cast out Satan? If Satan is risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end." And then he tells the story of the strong man bound, the parable of the strong man bound. And the "Q" section of this same story has Luke: "By whom do your sons cast them out?" and then "But if it is by the Spirit of God"-or as Luke has it "by the finger of God"-I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you."
The question is not, "Did the miracles happen?", the question is, "What do they mean? Does He do it by Satan or by demons? Or are these signs that the kingdom of God is breaking in?" Again, another of the miracles of Jesus, when He heals the paralytic who is carried by four men, who got up on the roof and lowered him through the ceiling, and Jesus said "My son, your sins are forgiven". And the Pharisees say, "Oh no, no, no. Who is this? Who can forgive sins but God alone? He's blaspheming". You see, "What does it mean? Who is He? He's a blasphemer!" And Jesus says, "Which is easier? To say 'OK, your sins are forgiven' or to say, 'Pick your bed up and walk'?" And so He says to the paralytic, "Pick up your bed and walk", and he did. And the parable ends by saying, "We never saw anything like this". What's the point? Miracle? No. The point is, what does it mean? What is it saying?
Again, in the thirteenth chapter of Luke, there's a woman in the synagogue on the sabbath, and Jesus sets her free. She's all bent over, and Jesus sets her free. And the ruler of the synagogue, in anger, says to the crowd in the synagogue, "Look you've got six days in the week to come and get healed, not on the sabbath". And Jesus replied, "Ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan bound for eighteen years, should she not be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?" What's the argument? What do the miracles mean? What are they saying? What do they mean? Who is He? What is He?
Before we dismiss the miracle stories, and you may feel yourself compelled to do so, before we do that, let's stop and ask, "What do they mean? What did they mean to the people who were there then? What were they saying?" Let's not dismiss it too easily, because not only is it a large portion of the Gospel, but in the apostolic teaching of the primitive Church, as Acts tells us about it, there are two sermons of Peter. One of which, the second chapter, goes this way, "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and signs which God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know, this one you crucified but God raised him." And again, in chapter 10, in the Cornelius event, Peter there speaks about "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him."
What do the miracles mean? That Jesus was a very successful deceiver? Or did it mean that something was going on that had to be taken seriously? That had something to do with the Kingdom of God, on the one hand, and the Kingdom of Evil, on the other? So the miracles made them ask questions-Who is He? What is He? What's he doing-but also the non-miraculous deeds of Jesus caused exactly the same questions. For example, it's clear that he played fast and loose with the Sabbath regulations. On the Sabbath, while he was going through the grainfields, his disciples plucked and ate some of the heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands. But some of the Pharisees said, "Why are you doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" And Jesus defends his disciples. You see they are threshing; they are working.
And again, on another Sabbath, when he entered the synagogue and taught, a man was there whose right hand was withered. And the scribes and Pharisees watched him, to see whether he would heal on the Sabbath, so that they might find an accusation against him.
And again, in chapter 13, there's a woman who is bent over for eighteen years. Over and over again he breaks the Sabbath day. Now you and I may say, "Oh, so what? Because, after all, the stores are open on the Sabbath, aren't they, and the Christian Sabbath too. But you see, for a Jew, that's not insignificant. It wasn't too long before the time of Jesus, in the time of the Syrian persecution of the Jews, one of the most vigorous persecutions ever inflicted upon the Jewish people, in the beginning of that persecution, on the Sabbath day the Syrian soldiers caught up with a lot of pious Jews, hiding out in the hills, and they were about to slaughter them, and the Jews did not defend themselves because it was the Sabbath. They allowed themselves to be massacred rather than break the Sabbath by picking up a sword and swinging it. The Maccabean leaders, incidentally, decided that really wasn't a good way to do these things, but that is another story. But you see how seriously they took it. Don't defend yourself on the Sabbath, because it's work! And that's wrong. And here is Jesus breaking the Sabbath, and we don't pay any attention to it, it doesn't mean anything. It's all been blunted. What it does mean:? Who is this? Who dares to break the Sabbath day over and over again? And you might notice the arguments that Jesus brings up in reply to the charges against him when his disciples are condemned because they work on the Sabbath. He talks about David and his company eating the shewbread. You see He doesn't just say, "Human need transcends rubrics." He talks about David and his company. Is that accident? What does it mean? Who is this? What is this? And the woman whom he sets free from her disability on the Sabbath, is not just a woman, but a daughter of Abraham who has been bound for eighteen years. Bound by whom? By Satan, who has bound her.
Another time when He breaks the Sabbath, Jesus says, "So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath". Now the scholars have had a marvelous time writing books about Who is the Son of Man? And what is the Son of man? What does the title mean? And so on. And they argue about this. The Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath. Is Jesus saying, humanity is more important than the Sabbath? Or is He talking about the Son of Man as a heavenly figure, and He is that Son of Man? Well the scholars worry about that. They write books. But, you see, the point is there is something there to argue about. It raises a question: Who is He? What is He? It's not just the miracles of Jesus that raise that question, it's the ordinary things he does over and over again.
And, as you know full well from the Gospels, he eats with sinners. And, you know, a well-brought-up clergyman is not supposed to do things like that. As He sat at table in his house, many tax collectors-I think we've just finished that part of the year that we set aside for paying taxes, that finished a couple of days ago, I think, or the last week-but I'm sure that revenuers were even worse back in Palestine. Many tax collectors and sinners were sitting with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. And the scribes and the Pharisees, when they saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, said to his disciples, "Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?"
And again, in Matthew's gospel, "The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a glutton and a wine bibber, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.'"
And in Matthew's gospel, "Truly I say to you, the tax collectors and the harlots go into the Kingdom of God before you, Oh scribes and Pharisees, and other such, because they believed John the Baptist and you people didn't".
You see it's not just the miracles of Jesus, it's the other things he does, over and over that pose the question, "What's going on? Who is He?"
Again, the teaching of Jesus. The sermon on the Mount, "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, 'You shall not kill, and whoever kills shall be liable to the judgment'. But I say to you, that every man who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment, whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says, 'You fool' shall be liable to the hell of fire". And we have a lot of other things in the Sermon on the Mount, "You have heard that it was said to them of old times 'But I say to you ...'" Who is this I? Who is this I who can say, "I say to you so-and-so..."? "You heard." Where did they hear it? In the written Law of God was where they heard these things. "You heard it was said in the law, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth' but I say to you, 'Do not resist one who is evil and if he strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also'". Who is this I who dares to challenge the law? Some will say, "Well he doesn't really break the law, he just sort of deepens it". But even so, who is He? Who is He who dares to deepen, or in some cases to challenge, the written revealed Law of God in the Old Testament?
And even worse when Jesus sort of disposes of the food laws, and tries to obstruct them seriously because that's part of the will of God. We're used to reading the bible, and "Oh, I like this portion, I'll keep that; I don't like that, so I'll ... besides it's the holiness code, and that's a help. Or, besides it's probably sneaked in there by some sixteenth century Spanish monk. Anything I don't like, out it goes. Or if it doesn't go out, at least ignore it. But if you're a Jew, you can't do that. If the Law is the will of God, who dares judge it?
Again when he talks of divorce, "Most said this but I say to you." Who is he? What is he? And again, some of the things in the Beatitudes, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of God. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Marvelous! But, who's he? Who's he to say things like this? How does he know who's going to see God? How does He know? By what authority do you say these things?
And again-my time is running along-but you see it's other things like Jesus using the word "Abba" to refer to his Father in prayer. "Abba, Father, take this cup away." Abba-a family term of endearment, of intimacy, and Jesus uses it in praying to his Father, and then He teaches us to do the same thing. And no Jew had done that before Jesus did. What's it all mean?
And the parables of Jesus. The same thing. They raise questions. We all know the parable of the sower and the seed and all this sort of thing, and then the interpretation that centers on why that seed didn't do very well, and that seed ... but the original point of the parable is what some of the seed-sure, you lose this and you lose that, you always do when you sow-but some of it bore fruit, a hundredfold, sixtyfold or thirtyfold. Its varied fruits.
And then there's another parable about, you know, that the seed grows until the sower, and when the crop's ready you put in the sickle. What's the harvest that's being harvested that you put in the sickle, when the time is ripe? Is He not in parables saying much of what Mark says was his proclamation, "Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." It's everything He does. Everything. The miracles, the non-miraculous actions, the teaching of Jesus, the parables of Jesus. Who is He? What is He? What's this all about?
Now in St. Mark's Gospel, in Chapter 1:27, when Jesus has cast out some unclean spirits, the people cry, "What is this? A new teaching! With authority He commands even unclean spirits and they obey him." Now the scholars have argued and debated and have written all sorts of little monographs on the words "with authority". Where does it go? The first part of the sentence or the second part? A new teaching with authority? Or does it go "with authority he commands the spirits." You see the very fact that they have to argue about this means just what I have been saying. It's all of a piece, you see, all of a piece. Who is He? What is He?
Now when we see this, the fresh look, then we may, for the first time, realize the tension, the great tension, when you get to the middle of the Gospel, what scholars are wont to call "the hinge" of the gospel, the story of Caesarea Philippi and blessed Peter. They have been asking these questions, "Who is He? What is He? What's it all about?" And then Jesus takes his disciples aside and says, "I've a question for you, "Who do men say that I am?" And what are the answers? John the Baptist, back to life again? Elijah? He's got something to do with the messianic kingdom. Or one of the prophets? Prophecy again? You see it's all sort of circling around the messianic theme, but it's not really in the bull's eye. It's around it, but it's not in the middle. "All right, who do you say I am?" And Peter, the spokesman for the whole group, says, "You are the Christ." And maybe-maybe, it depends upon the manuscript-he may say, "You are the Christ, the Son of God". And the "Christ the Son of God" in Matthew reads "Christ the Son of the Living God". Now how much did Peter mean by this? "You are the Christ, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity"? It's not very likely, is it? In the first place, you've got to know about the doctrine of the Trinity, and the Council of Nicaea hasn't met. Now obviously he doesn't mean that much, because two verses later, or three, or whatever it is, he tells Jesus that his theology is really very deficient. So how much does he mean by "You are Christ the Son of God"? Well, you know kings of Israel were called "The son of God", and in fact every Israelite is the son of God, in a sense, and so how much does Peter mean? At least, you see, here's the question. Do you see the drama and the punch of it? "Who do men say I am? What do you say?" 'You are the Christ." Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for God the Father finally got it through your thick head. Now that you've learned chapter 1, let's go to chapter 2. And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. And Peter, the spokesman of the disciples, says, "Oh, no, you've got it all wrong". "Get behind me, Satan. For you are not on the side of God, but of men."
And the second part of the gospel, He goes up to Caesarea Philippi and makes the first prediction of the Passion, and then-zip!--downhill! Downhill. Ever increasing momentum until you get to the Cross and the Resurrection. He began to teach them about that. A messiah, yes, but a radically different kind of messiah. The kind of messiah that Peter doesn't want. And we don't want. Peter is the spokesman for the disciples; he's the spokesman for us. But it's not just Peter. It's also John the Baptist. You see you might at first think, "Ah, yes, "I proclaim you a God who is loving, merciful and forgiving". And at the first step I might say, "Oh, that's nice. I like that kind of God. Forgive me, and be merciful to me, and kind, and loving. That's nice." Until you stop and think about it. But you see if this God is going to be merciful and loving and kind to me, he's very likely to do it to you too. And other people who do some things you and I think are decidedly wrong. And not only that-it gets even worse. Because, if he's like that to me, and like that to you, and like that to those obvious sinners out there somewhere, the next thing you know he's going to tell you, you ought to treat each other that way too. Now you're really meddling.
So you see, isn't there a bit of Peter in each one of us? And it's not just Peter. What about John the Baptist? It started with him. What's John the Baptist want? "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." And that's exactly what they deserve. So John the Baptist later sends some of his disciples to Jesus and they say, "Are you he who should come, or do we look for another?" Not the kind of messiah John the Baptist was looking for. Not the kind that Peter was looking for. Not the kind we're looking for. But you see it is just the kind of messiah, as Michael Ramsey pointed out a long time ago ... Jesus proclaims the sovereignty of God, the Kingdom of God, the sovereignty of God, and then he talks about achieving it how? By his death. Sovereignty and self-giving. Kingship and sacrifice. How do they combine?
You see, what Peter and John the Baptist and you and I have trouble with is not just what kind of messiah is this, but if He's God's messiah, then what kind of a God is God? What kind of a God is He? How is his sovereignty exercised? We talk about Christus Rex, but, you know it's not just a messiah, it's what kind of a Father wants a messiah like that? Sometimes, you see, without knowing we do it, we think we know what God the Father's like. There's my pattern of God with all his attributes. I've got it all lined up, and then I think about Jesus, and I put him alongside and I ask, "Does Jesus fit this?" That's not the New Testament. What does the New Testament say? "No man has seen God at any time, the only Son, He has made him known." How do we know what God the Father's like? God, the Almighty, the immortal one, is the kind of a Father who has a Son like Jesus. That's what this incident is all about, and we can be sure of that, because what follows immediately is the Transfiguration. In the New Testament you will find very few indications of time. This is exactly what you would expect, because, you see, when they met Jesus, and started going around with this carpenter from Nazareth, nobody knew He was the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. And they didn't have date books and calendars, and stenographic shorthand notes, so they went around taking notes. On April. the 2nd He first told the parable of the sower of the seed. And on May the 3rd. he gave a revised version of it. They didn't know this, you see. So you practically never will have complete time indications. Of course, in Mark's gospel "immediately" He did this. I mean you get "immediately", about every ten or twelve verses in Mark. It gets a little much. But now, "Six days after ...". Six days. Luke has about eight days. Extremely unusual exact indication of time, He took James and John and Peter, up on a mountain, and He was transfigured before them, and there came a voice from Heaven saying, "This is my beloved Son, hear him". Listen to him. Listen to him when He says what? What is it that Peter has such trouble hearing? Why is it that James and John who want the chief seats have trouble hearing? What is it that you and I and John the Baptist have trouble hearing? "The Son of Man must suffer, and be rejected, be killed, and rise again. Listen to him". And then we speed on in the Gospel and the story of the Passion and the death and the burial. And you know about a third of the gospel is taken up with one week, or about a week, depending. How come? Why is there so much space for such a little bit of time? Because, you see, we have to answer the question why, why does he get killed? And in some of the modern portraits of Jesus, "Oh, you're so wonderful and loving." And you get this message, "Let's all be nice to one another, and life would be so much better." If that's all there is to it, why did they kill him? Unless He got so unacceptably boring that they couldn't take it. Why does He get killed? That's important. Why? Why? Well, because all those miracles He did, and the other things He did, and the teaching He did, and the parables, asking "Who is He? Who is He? What is He? What's going on?" And what's the answer? What's the answer? And so they killed him. And He's killed as a king. He's killed as a victim, as a priest, but he's also killed as a king. What kind of a king? With a criminal on the right and on the left, a king on a cross with a title over it "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews". And they go to Pilate-Oh, gee, what a man that is-"Don't write King of the Jews! write 'He claimed to be King of the Jews'". And Pilate, replied "What I have written, I have written." And he went home and said to Mrs. Pilate, "Oh I really told the Jews off today. They were complaining about this, and I said to them, "I wrote it and that's the end of it." Oh, dear. So they killed him. And then He's raised. On the Mount of the Transfiguration a voice from heaven says, "This my beloved Son, listen to him". In the Resurrection, God speaks, no longer in word, but in deed; for He raises Jesus, the Christ, who has been dead and buried. He raises him from the dead, and says, by action, "This is my beloved Son. Listen, listen to him. Listen to him."
When talking of the Transfiguration, and the confession of Peter at Caesarea Philippi, I said, "You know, the kind of messiah Jesus is tells us something about God. Well the Resurrection does too, you see. Because very seldom, in fact I think it's only once, in the New Testament, do we read that Jesus rose from the dead. Instead it's, "He was raised by God". The Resurrection tells us about Jesus. The Resurrection says what He did, and what He said, are true. Listen to him. But it also tells us about God the Father. If He raised Jesus, then obviously He must have approved of what Jesus did, and of what Jesus said. It tells us about Him. Paul writes in Romans that righteousness will be reckoned to us who believe in him that raised from the dead Jesus our Lord. What is God, the almighty, the immortal, what's He like? He is like one who would raise Jesus from the dead.
And First Peter, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." And in the epistles of Paul, over and over again do you read, in King James version, it's, "God and the Father of Jesus Christ", A better translation would read, "God, even the Father of Jesus Christ". What is He like? The immortal, the invisible? What is he like? The God who raised Jesus from the dead!
I hope that I have made you, have been able to help you, to listen afresh to some of the things the Gospel is saying. And I will pray for you and for me, that it might become possible for us on occasion, deliberately setting aside preconceptions of the past, to read the Gospels anew and to let them speak with some of the power, some of the freshness, yes, some of the shock, that would come if we were reading them for the very first time, with nothing else in our memories when we did. The message of the Gospel, I believe, is, fundamentally, that of the Transfiguration, and that of the Resurrection. "This is my beloved Son. Listen to Him."
Return to The Teaching
Mission table of contents