New Year's Day...Pastor Phil Strong
New Year’s Day 2012
Text: Ephesians 3:14-21
December 20th’s edition of the USA Today records…
“Gallup poll finds a nation more downbeat, more dissatisfied with its
political leadership and more concerned about the country’s direction
than at almost any other point in modern times.”
[FYI… to demonstrate just how desperate we are for some
diversion/distraction from our own reality: Lady Gaga was recognized as
the “Entertainer of the Year”
J-
so]
Most disheartening of all…
ESPN (April, 2011):
reported that John Lucas (former NBA great) resigned as Jamarcus
Russell’s “Life Coach”.
You gotta wonder where your life
is headed when the person who is supposedly coaching you calls it quits!
As humans, I suppose what the day represents (metaphorically) is as
significant as the day itself: a blank page.
As we conduct our mental
“year-in-review”, we notice how many of the events were “scheduled”;
we cleared space for them on our calendar; we pursued them with some
degree of intentionality.
Other events which dotted the landscape were unexpected; they
seemingly forced their way into our schedule with little regard for our
agenda.
Some of those events were rather
inconsequential. Some ‘grazed us’. Some left ‘scars’.
In the ‘new life’ (renewed life) with God, the scars aren’t abolished.
“See my hands”,
Jesus said. “Put your finger
here. Reach out your hand and put it in my side” (John 20).
● They don’t reduce us, in any way; they aren’t a statement about the
lack of quality of our faith; they don’t prohibit us from realizing a
better future. In fact, they distinguish us. They can ‘give us
character’ (e.g. like an old piece of furniture that is nicked up).
All relationships begin with a “yes”. Successful, flourishing
relationships are sustained and nurtured by the perpetual “yes” of
commitment.
The “yes” of commitment must manifest itself in countless and ordinary
ways in order to realize the desired intent: mutually satisfying,
mutually serving love.
Colossians 2:21-23
"Don't handle, don't eat, don't touch." Such rules are mere human
teaching about things that are gone as soon as we use them. These rules
may seem wise (sound like a good idea) because they require strong
devotion, humility, and severe bodily discipline. But they have no
effect when it comes to conquering a person's evil thoughts and
desires.”
Most of our ‘resolutions’ are unsustainable and lack resolve for (2)
reasons:
First,
they reek of self-imposed
goodness. In that context there’s no ‘margin for error’; where’s
there’s no room for human error, there’s no room for grace.
Second,
they are ‘shame-based’.
They are always motivated by disappointment (e.g. we’re not skinny
enough, we’re not smart enough, we’re not disciplined enough, we don’t
have enough, etc.).
This is really the easy path to change; I know because I’m familiar with
it (I’m not good at it, but it’s the one I’m most comfortable with).
But,
change is not what we are
after,
transformation is the
desired result; and transformation is the challenging, messy,
life-altering process that will somehow encourage our progress, but
never allow us to feel as if we’ve arrived.
●
Interestingly, it’s the same word used in Matthew 17 to describe this
occasion we call Jesus’
“transfiguration”. He was
not turning into someone else, he was being revealed for what was truly
there, but often not fully evidenced to the naked eye.
● John 21 records one of the
most interesting and awkward dialogues in all of the Scriptures.
We
keep returning to our failure for some distorted sense of
self-deprecation, but we find Jesus taking a different approach.
The question Jesus asks in our failure is not,
“Why’d you do that?!”,
but,
“Do you love me?”
“Do you love me?” Who knew that a question could wound so deeply, but
also become the source of such profound healing.
If you’re as vulnerable as Peter, how do you answer that question? If I
say, “Yes”, then Jesus could
say, “Oh, you love me… so, how
does this whole ‘denial’ thing fit into that?”
“Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him a third time…”
So, since he can’t really trust his heart right now, he just trusts
Jesus.
“You know everything…” He
doesn’t want to be inauthentic, so he just leaves the analysis to Jesus.
● I’m not sure that I really ever appreciated the extravagance of God’s
love and grace until I first experienced the depth of my sin and the
extent of the damage it had done to my soul.
“Whoever has been forgiven little loves little”
(Luke 7:47).
I think that our love for God will always be directly- proportionate to
our understanding of the human dilemma and the extravagance of grace.
Our journey with Jesus begins with a ‘yes’. But, the sentimental ‘yes’,
the rhetorical ‘yes’ is too easy.
Do you think the quality of Peter’s love was somehow altered after this
encounter?
The love that resulted was a love that had survived personal failures,
bold declarations, false starts, our prideful achievements as well as
careless ‘relapses’. It’s a
“principal” love; a
“primary” love; a
“first” love.
“Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love”
(Revelation 2).
I’m not convinced that John is referring to the love that they had when
they first were introduced to Christ. That love was
rousing, but untested; unproven
(e.g. the love that I have for my wife now is not the same love I had
for her in 1982).
Frankly, it never really helps just to get someone to the point where
they are willing to see themselves for who they really are, if you
aren’t prepared to offer them a more compelling vision of who they
can become.
In Peter’s disappointment and frustration, the first place he needed to
look was to Jesus for his reaction.
He needed to know that Jesus was
“for” him.
Somehow, the story is less about our faith in God and more about God’s
faith in us (expansive thought).
Each response from Peter was met with a renewed sense of identity and
mission. It was Jesus’ way of saying,
“Peter, I trust what’s in your
heart, even if you don’t.”
Grace means that the relationship is already stronger than the wrongs
committed against it. Therefore, I can live in love, not
fear; under the weight of gratitude, not the weight of
indebtedness/obligation.