Heavenly Mindedness (40)

 

Continuing our reflections on Geerhardus Vos’s Message on “Heavenly Mindedness” from Hebrews 11:9 – 10:

 

“And this applies not merely to objects of natural affection; it involves also much that is of transitory purpose in the service and Church of God. Even our religion in its earthly exercise is not exempt from the tragical aspect borne by all existence in time. The summons comes again and again: “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house,” and after a brief spell of comfort and delight we anew find ourselves in tents roaming through an inhospitable world. There is no help for these things. Like Abraham we must resolutely confess, that we are strangers and pilgrims in a land of time, and that the best this land can offer us is but a caravanserai to tarry in for a day and a night.” G. Vos.

 

Returning to “transitory purpose in the service and Church of God”:

 

Not only are there things we do for a certain moment and in a certain season, but there are things we speak and teach into particular seasons and moments; and while these words ought to be birthed in eternity and the Word, their purpose may be short lived. A danger arises when we build systems and structures out of the short lived, not recognizing their transitory nature. Much the same can be said for our experiences, while knowing the Trinity intimately ought to be an ever-deepening experience, we may pass through many individual experiences in this one Grand Experience.

 

As I write this, there are around 200 azaleas in glorious bloom surrounding our home in various varieties and colors; this is a particularly spectacular spring. However, the colors will soon be gone. Next year the colors will be back, but they may or may not be as spectacular, they may or may not bloom together as they have mostly done this year. What would you think if, after the colors are gone this year, I spent the rest of the year not seeing the remaining beauty of what remains after the colors, but rather trying to “will” the colors back? Foolish? Yet, perhaps this is what we are tempted to do when we make one experience our benchmark, our litmus test, our measure – when that experience is not meant to be a continuum, but rather as a point or season on the Grand Continuum.

 

Jesus and His disciples did not remain on the Mount of Transfiguration any more than Paul remained in the Third Heaven. Peter would continue to draw from his experience with Jesus on the Mount (1 Peter 1:16 – 18), but Peter did not see that as our norm on this pilgrimage, in fact his first letter is clear that he saw the opposite – suffering for Christ - as our norm.

 

Now I want to ask us to think about something that is not palatable, when I began working with the above quote from Vos I mentioned that there are two facets of “transitory purpose” that I wanted to touch on, and that one was more palatable than the other; I think I may have been putting the second aspect off, and I’m not sure I can express myself well on this…were it not for a sense of duty I would leave it alone.

 

The very idea of growth, of an organic body growing to maturity, of a Temple being built, of a Bride being cleansed with the washing of water with the Word; all carry with them a sense of progression, of stages, of seasons. A challenge is not to mistake the stage of growth and understanding we are in for the goal, it is not to mistake what it is to be ten years old with adulthood, or with being a young adult with middle-aged, or with being middle-aged with being an elder. In our society with its perpetual youth movement, and with adults, even elder adults, often acting like children, this may be difficult to visualize.

 

Being ten years old was always meant to be transitory; being 23 years old was always meant to be transitory; being 41 years old was always meant to be transitory. Every year of my life, however long this life may be, is meant to be transitory – transitory in the sense that it is coming out from one place into another.

 

This does not mean that it is to be an untethered life, a life without foundation, or a life without purpose and trajectory – this does not mean that it is an ephemeral life – but rather that it is lived in continual transition from “glory to glory” into the image of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 3:17 – 18). This does not mean that it is about experience for the sake of experience – which is a grave error within elements of the professing church – for our Father’s purpose is that we be “conformed to the image of His Son” (Romans 8:29). Therefore, our transitions into His image require our submission to the Word of God, the Holy Spirit, and the lordship of Jesus Christ. This is anything but ephemeral, it is substantive and eternal.

 

This is not only true for individuals and marriages, but it is also true for congregations and denominations and traditions. (When I use the term ‘tradition” I’m referring to understandings and practices within historical groups, such as Brethren, Reformed, Anglican, Lutheran, Wesleyan, Pentecostal. I also want to be clear that I am thinking about those of us who seek to be faithful to the Bible, not those elements which have no problem being paid as clergy or seminary professors while at the same time attacking the Word of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.)

 

While we are certainly called to build upon that which has gone before us, both in experience and in understanding and wisdom, if we are going to continue on our pilgrimage as the People of God we are not going to live as if frozen in time – whether in our experience or in our understanding. Our understanding of God’s Word ought to be ever deepening, our experience in the Trinity as a People ought to be ever more wonderful. We should be a People “going out” so that we may be a People “going in.”

 

Why cannot we see Christ in the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings? (Luke 24:27, 44 – 45). Why are we reduced to a list of fulfilled prophecies as opposed to actually learning to “see” Christ throughout the Old Testament? Why do we allow our traditions to form our understanding of the Bible rather than submit our traditions to the Bible? Why don’t we talk about the challenge inherent in living with our traditions and the Bible? (And I mean not only our practical traditions in terms of the way we do things, I also mean our theological traditions with their various emphases.)

 

Should a doctrinal emphasis of five hundred years ago continue to take center stage today, or should it lead to fuller understanding of the Word of God and the Person of Jesus Christ and greater maturity of the People of God (Ephesians 4:11 – 16)? We can ask the same question of doctrinal emphases of the 19^th century.

 

Romans 1:1 – 5:11 is wonderful, but without Romans 5:12 – 8:39 we do not have the fulness of the Gospel. Indeed, without the balance of Romans we do not have what the Gospel looks like when it is manifested within the People of God.

 

Are we seeking the City of the Living God, are we seeking the glory of that City in Christ; are we living in tents, or have we built permanent structures that we refuse to leave?

 

Hebrews 12:1 – 3.