Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship Part II – Reflections (37)

 

 

From page 252 through page 257 Bonhoeffer addresses church discipline. This is a challenging section since it is so foreign to our experience, yet the fact that this should not be the case is demonstrated in Bonhoeffer’s use of Scripture throughout the passage. Church discipline is integral to church-community, yet it is so removed from our experience that it is difficult to think about it, talk about it, and pretty much impossible to practice it. Yet, Bonhoeffer considers church discipline so important that this section may be the longest sustained argument he makes in Discipleship.

 

I wrestled with how to approach this section, and I thought about giving it passing acknowledgment and then moving on to the next section. On the one hand it seems futile to explore deeply Bonhoeffer’s (and the Bible’s) teaching on church discipline because the likelihood of us practicing it is remote, on the other hand providing an outline of the section is in keeping with our journey through Part II of Discipleship.

 

As with the rest of Discipleship, there is no substitute for reading and pondering the text for yourself, what I write is not intended to take the place of the text, not with Bonhoeffer, not with the Bible; never, never, never.

 

While Bonhoeffer makes an extended argument for church discipline, grounded in Scripture, it may not seem long enough in that he raises questions that he does not answer. While they may not be questions in his mind, they are questions that most of us will have, we will ask, “Just what does he mean?” Yet, the section is long enough in that it gives us plenty to ponder, and the questions are such that there is likely no closure to them – there will always be facets to discover – after all, we are dealing with God, Scripture, and human experience…a never-ending journey.

 

“For the church-community to live a life worthy of the gospel, it must maintain the practice of church discipline” (page 252). If we keep in mind that this chapter is titled The Saints, then perhaps we will see that Bonhoeffer is saying that to live as saints in Christ, we must live within the visible church-community and that living in this community means that we practice church discipline.

 

Before we move into the text I want to make some observations as to why this subject can be so challenging.

 

A.      We seldom, if ever, see church discipline Biblically practiced. When it is practiced it is typically in a harsh and heartless manner or it is on the other extreme, without backbone and definition. As a rule, we avoid church discipline; it is too uncomfortable and unpleasant and we don’t want to be misunderstood or offend people.

B.      We don’t understand the Nature of the Church. The Church is the Temple of God, the Body of Christ, and God disciplines those He loves. He has given the responsibility of discipline, as Bonhoeffer demonstrates, to the Church – not as a option but as a command. The Church is not a social – service organization, it is not a civic club, its roots are not of the earth but in heaven, we are to live under the authority of Christ and His Word; we are accountable to Christ, to His Word, and to one another.

C.     The Church is to be holy as God is holy. This holiness is holistic, it begins in the depths of the soul and expresses itself in our hearts, minds, and bodies. We are called to holiness because we are called into intimacy with the Holy One, and we are called to His holiness for the blessing and sanctification of one another and the ultimate blessing of the world. We are no more to tolerate sin in our souls than we are to tolerate cancer in our bodies. I do not take offense if my dermatologist removes a cancerous cell from my body, why do I take offense when a brother helps me identify and remove (by God’s grace!) sin from my life?

D.     The Church is not a necessity in our lives. We are consumers, and if one local congregation doesn’t suit us, we will move on to another. If one congregation offends us, we will find one that caters to our desires. Church discipline doesn’t mean much if our relational bonds do not mean everything to us, by that I mean that unless our koinonia is such that the Body of Christ is our life, then it means little if we come under discipline…we will simply move on to another congregation; or we will go it alone.

E.       There is no unity in the professing church. That is, we have multiple franchises, each competing for attendees and members, each seeking greater market share. We ignore Christ’s words about unity in John 17, we think we know better. This means that we will typically receive someone into our fellowship who has been disciplined by another congregation with no questions asked. We will accept professing Christians as immediate members without looking into their backgrounds, without obtaining references from a previous congregation.

I recall interviewing a prospective member at a church (two deacons were with me) and asking her to tell me about not only coming to know Jesus, but about her church background. She said, “No one has ever asked me about this and I’ve belonged to a few churches."

 

I once pastored in an area in which most pastors required premarital counseling prior to officiating at a wedding. This united front was helpful to pastors, churches, and couples; though some couples sought to avoid it. If we were united in our service to Christ and others, we could at least attempt to honor church discipline, teach it, practice it, and cooperate in it.

F.       We don’t care about sin, we don’t name it, we tolerate it, accept it, and at times promote it. We tend to approach sin as a sickness that requires therapy rather than confession and repentance. We don’t dare deal with sin Biblically lest we lose members and alienate those attendees who are considering membership. Pastors can easily lose their jobs by preaching against sin and calling us to obedient discipleship. Sin is old fashioned and unenlightened, it makes us uncomfortable…Jesus wouldn’t want that…would He? (See Revelation chapters 2 – 3).

 

For sure the above raise their own questions; this seems simple, but it can be complex, and it seems complex, but it is also simple. Bonhoeffer insists on church discipline and bases his insistence on the Bible, not on our feelings. I don’t pretend to know all the answers, and as a pastor I have seldom done a good job in this area – the reasons for this are likely many.

 

However, in my friendships I am thankful that I have brothers who I can talk to and who can talk to me; who I can speak the truth to and who will speak the truth to me. Because of my age there are less and less of them (there have never been many), but as long as there is still one then I have the protection of such a relationship.

 

For protection it is. We are protected from ourselves, the world, the flesh, and the devil when we speak the truth to one another, when we do not hide from one another. (Much of what passes for “church” is a grown-up form of “hide and seek,” a game we play much of our lives.) If we must be concerned about what others think, let us hope they will think enough of us, care enough for us, to tell us the truth and to invite us to speak the truth into their own lives. Otherwise, what others think doesn’t matter.

 

We’ll return to Bonhoeffer’s text in our next post in this series, the Lord willing.

 

 

Ernest Gordon (1)

 

Angus McGillivary

 

In a Japanese prison camp in Thailand during WWII:

 

“He’s dead.”

 

“Dead? How?”

 

For a moment Dusty could not speak. I could see that he was deeply moved. I wondered why, for he could scarcely have known McGillivray.

 

“It’s hard to say. He was strong. In fact, he was one of those you’d expect would be the last to die. But then I suppose he needn’t have died.”

 

“Then why did he?”

 

Dusty sat down on my bed.

 

“It has to do with Angus’s mucker,” he began, ‘who became very ill.”

 

It was the custom among the Argylls for every man to have a ‘mucker’ – that is, a pal or friend with whom he shared or ‘mucked in’ everything he had.

 

“It seemed pretty certain to everyone,” Dusty continued, “that the mucker was going to die. Certain, that is, to everyone but Angus. He made up his mind that his mucker would live. Someone had stolen his mucker’s blanket. Angus gave him his own. Every meal-time Angus would show up to draw his ration. But he didn’t eat it. He would bring it round to give to his friend. Stood over him, he did, and made him eat it. Going hungry was hard on Angus, mind you, because he was a big man, with a big frame.”

 

As Dusty talked on, I could see it all happening – Angus drawing on his strength through his will and depleting his own body to make his friend live.

 

“His mates noticed that Angus had taken to slipping out of the camp at night,” Dusty went on. “These excursions could have only one purpose. He was visiting the Thai villages. It was taken for granted that he had joined the black-marketeers! Angus, of all people! This shocked the others, for he was known as a man of high principles."

 

As men died in the camp, it became possible for others to come into possession of objects of some value – watches, shirts, shorts, knives and so on. These were highly prized by the Thais, who would gladly pay for them in their paper money known as bahts’, worth about one-and-sixpence each. Or they would barter for the goods, offering medicine or duck eggs.

 

“Although Angus’s mates thought that he was trying to make a bit of money for himself, they didn’t begrudge it to him,” said Dusty. “Perhaps you can guess the end of the story. The mucker got better. Then Angus collapsed. Just pitched on his face and died.”

 

“And what did the docs say caused it?” I asked.

 

“Starvation,” answered Dusty, “complicated by exhaustion.”

 

“And all for his friend?”

 

Dusty sat in stillness.

 

(Excerpted from To End All Wars, by Ernest Gordon, Zondervan, pages 99 – 100).

 

Ernest Gordon, a British officer and a Scot, had been given up for dead in the POW camp, but Dusty and others were determined to nurture him back to life. Gordon entered the camp not believing in God, that would change. Gordon would later come to the US and become the dean of chapel at Princeton, serving at Princeton from 1954 until 1981.

 

The Bridge Over the River Kwai (movie and book) is a fictionalized account of the railroad of death, Gordon’s To End All Wars (published earlier under other titles) is the true story, a story from which we can learn much. (Believe me when I say that Gordon’s book is far better and deeper and moving than the movie by the same name.)

 

The prisoners became subhuman, stealing from one another, unfeeling toward one another, driven by hate and despair. In the few, however, there was sacrificial love, and in the midst of hell, love prevailed – there was, as Gordon writes, a “miracle on the River Kwai.”

 

The prisoners became a community of love, serving one another, caring for one another, seeking Christ, serving Christ, and ultimately offering water, food, and aid to wounded and defeated Japanese soldiers. Jesus Christ transcended their suffering, He transcended war.

 

Love makes no sense. The Cross of Christ makes no sense. When Jesus says, “Love your enemies,” we respond, “Yeah but.” When Jesus says, “Lay down your life,” we reply, “Yeah but.”

 

During a conversation with Dusty, Ernest asked, “Why doesn’t He [God] do something, instead of sitting quiescently on a great big white throne in the no-place called heaven?”

 

Gordon writes, Dusty considered for a moment. Then he said, “Maybe He does…maybe He does…but we can’t see everything He is doing now. Maybe our vision isn’t very good at this point, for here we see in a glass darkly.”

 

Then Dusty quoted from a poem by Ernest Howard Crosby:

 

No one could tell me where my soul might be;

I sought for God, but God eluded me;

I sought my brother out and found all three –

My soul, my God, and all humanity.

 

“We love, because He first loved us. If someone says, “I love God,” and yet he hates his brother or sister, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother and sister whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God must also love his brother and sister” (1 John 4:19 – 21).

 

“We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for our brethren” (1 John 3:16)

 

Ernest and Dusty saw Jesus Christ in Angus McGillivray, what do others see in our congregations?

 

In me?

 

In you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revelation – Letter to a Friend (5)

 

 

I had a dear friend who was a landscape painter; he is now with the Lord. One of the blessings of having an artistic friend is watching the creative process, both in the moment as he brings a canvass to life and over years as you absorb the body of his work. We have two paintings and one print of his hanging in our home, and to see them is to see my friend, not just to see the individual work, but to see years of friendship and to see the individual work within his body of work.

 

A visitor to our home may appreciate a painting, but he cannot appreciate the body of work for he does not know the body of work. As much as a visitor may enter into a painting, he cannot possibly appreciate my friend’s body of work; for while the body of work expresses common threads and nuances, all of these are not necessarily contained in every individual painting, or if they are, they may not always be discernable.

 

One of the original paintings we have is quite special, in fact, it is especially special. It is a beach scene from the Outer Banks of North Carolina and it has five people in it. Two of the people are walking down the beach together. One person, a woman, is sitting in a sand chair close to the ocean. A man is sitting in a chair under an umbrella reading a book. A young woman is sitting in a chair under an umbrella not far from the man.

 

The couple walking down the beach are strangers to the artist.

 

The young woman is the artist’s daughter.

 

The woman in the sand chair is my wife Vickie.

 

I am the man reading the book.

 

Our friend and his family were vacationing with us and the painting is from a photo he took.

 

This would be a special painting if I told you no more about it, but there is more. You don’t know there is more, but there is more.

 

Our friend seldom included people in his paintings. Animals yes, people no.

 

His wife, however, is also an artist. They collaborated on this painting, our friend the husband painting the landscape and our friend the wife painting the people. They painted this for us as a Christmas gift. This painting has always been prominently displayed in our home and we love telling the story of our friends as people admire the beautiful scene.

 

Someone familiar with the husband’s body of work might view the painting and say, “That’s unusual, I’ve never seen people in his paintings.” Someone unfamiliar with our friend would not think the people unusual.

 

Darrell W. Johnson writes that the imagery of Revelation “sustains the new vision of reality” (page 22). “The images have to stay as they are, for it is the image that embodies the message” (page 23).

 

On page 23 Johnson has a quote from Eugene Boring which we would do well to ponder:

 

“They [Revelation’s images] are not mere illustrations of something that can be said more directly. A picture makes its own statement; it is its own text. It does not communicate what it has to say by being reduced to discursive, propositional language. Just as is the case in visiting an art gallery, while commentary and explanation may help one to ‘get the picture,’ language about the picture can never replace the message communicated in and through the picture itself…

 

“It would be a violation of Revelation’s mode of communication to attempt to summarize its message in a manner that would make the image itself unnecessary.” (Italics mine).

 

Now let me attempt to tie my story about our artist friend and the imagery of Revelation together.

 

“John sees what he sees and hears what he hears through his Old Testament-informed imagination. There are more than 500 quotations from and/or allusions to the Old Testament in his work. This fact alone tells me that if I want to read Revelation correctly, I, too, need to be steeped in the whole biblical story” (page 23, italics mine).

 

It is one thing to see one of my friend’s paintings, it is another thing to see the painting in the context of his body of work. With Revelation, it is more of a case that we can see very little in a scene, in an image, unless we see it in the tapestry of the Old Testament, unless we see the images of the Old Testament flowing into and through the imagery of Revelation. A single painting by my friend is not likely to be misinterpreted, each painting can stand alone. However, misunderstanding a single passage of Revelation is highly likely if two things are missing; a heart seeking the unveiling of Jesus Christ, and a heart, mind, and soul steeped in the Old Testament.

 

Another way to put this is, if we do not know the prophet Zechariah, if we do not know Exodus, if we do not know Ahab and Jezebel, if these images and stories are not coming through the pores of our skin, then we had better think again before we think we know much about Revelation. Furthermore, if our desire is not for Jesus Christ, to know Him, obey Him, and tell others of Him – no matter the cost! – then we had better think again before we are so very foolish as to think we can gain insight into Revelation.

 

Anyone teaching Revelation outside the context of radical obedience to Jesus Christ, which means nonnegotiable witness today, is someone to be avoided.

 

Does this mean that if we are low on the Biblical learning curve that Jesus will not reveal Himself to us through Revelation? I don’t think it means that, for the Holy Spirit takes of His and reveals it to us (John 16:12 – 15). However, it does mean that our vision is limited by our Biblical travels, our context. It also means that we are more susceptible to being diverted by teachers who sensationalize their “prophetic” teaching and who seek to entice us to discern the entrails of the news and current events rather than seek Jesus Christ.

 

We cannot, I think, touch and experience the texture of Revelation without living in the texture of the Old Testament. This does not happen overnight and any teacher or pastor who says otherwise is to be avoided – discipleship is a lifelong journey, there are no quick avenues to conformity to the image of Jesus Christ. To see Jesus in the text of Revelation is to be continually challenged to obedience to Him and witness for Him to others.

 

And here let me again quote Johnson on page 16 of his book:

 

“I am, therefore, gladly constrained to simply live in the particular texts of the Revelation until they open themselves up to me; or, as I should say, live in the text until the Jesus of the text breaks though to me.”

 

It seems to me that this humility, and this recognition of our need for Jesus and the Holy Spirit, is the prerequisite for not only "seeing” Revelation, but for reading and experiencing the entire Bible.

 

 

Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship Part II – Reflections (36)

 

 

On page 249 Bonhoeffer points out that while there are many works “of the flesh,” there is only one “fruit of the Spirit” (5:19ff; Eph. 5:9).

 

“Works are dead, but fruit is alive and the bearer of seeds which themselves produce new fruit… [fruit is] something that has grown organically…The fruit of the Spirit is a gift of which God is the sole source. Those bearing this fruit are…unaware of it…The only thing they are aware of is the power of the one from whom they receive their life” (page 249).

 

“The saints themselves are unaware of the fruit of sanctification they bear. The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing…if they decide to engage in self-contemplation, then they would have already torn themselves away from the root and their time of bearing fruit would have passed” (page 249).

 

On page 250 Bonhoeffer directs us to Galatians 5:22 – 24; 2:20; 1 Cor. 15:31, and 2 Cor. 4:16 with the following thoughts:

 

Galatians 5:22 – 24 speaks of both the sanctification of the individual and the holiness of the church-community; the source of both is community with Christ and in Christ and with one another in Christ.

 

The deeper our growth in sanctification, the more we recognize that we are dying according to the flesh, “Those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (Gal. 5:24).

 

The fact that we still live in the flesh means that our entire lives must be “an act of faith in the Son of God who has begun His own life in them” (Gal. 2:20).

 

Christ is our “daily death and…daily life.”

 

The fruit of the Spirit cannot remain invisible to the world, indeed, it is such that from ancient times forward the world has said, “See how they love one another.” Here we might add John 13:34 – 35 to Bonhoeffer’s text.

 

On page 251, as Bonhoeffer considers that we are in fact saints in Christ, he writes, “These very same Christians, who embrace the truth that sin no longer rules over them, and that the believer no longer sins, will also confess that ‘if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.’”

 

He quotes 1 John 1:8 – 2:1 in helping us to see the “already – not yet” of our life in Christ, of us being complete in Him (Col. 2:10) while at the same time living in the process of sanctification. Those who do not live in the tension of 1 John 1:8 – 2:1, who cannot “see” this dynamic of our life in Christ, often live on one of two ends of the spectrum. On one end they insist that our identity is that of sinners, on the other end they insist that we no longer need to speak of sin, beware of sin, teach against sin, or seek the Holy Spirit’s conviction of sin.

 

I have known Jesus Christ, in some measure…it is a mystery to me…since 1966, and I will say that 1 John 1:9 is more precious to me today than ever before. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

 

We could ponder 1 John 1:8 – 2:1 every day for the rest of our lives and not exhaust its treasures.

 

Bonhoffer also makes the point that as Christ forgives us, so we ought to forgive one another “without ceasing” (Eph. 4:32; Matt. 18:21ff). Forgiveness is to be our way of life, both in the receiving and the giving.

 

“The community of saints is not the ‘ideal’ church-community of the sinless and perfect. It is not the church-community of those without blemish, which no longer provides room for the sinner to repent. Rather it is the church-community that shows itself worthy of the gospel of forgiveness of sins by truly proclaiming God’s forgiveness, which has nothing to do with forgiving oneself. It is the community of those who have truly experienced God’s costly grace, and who thereby live a life worthy of the gospel which they neither squander nor discard” (pages 251 – 252).

 

I would like to ask Bonhoeffer why he inserted “which has nothing to do with forgiving oneself.” Of course this is true, but I would like to know what he encountered that motivated him to make this point.

 

There is nothing in the Bible, not directly nor by extrapolation that supports the idea that we must forgive ourselves. In fact, the Scriptures are clear that only in Jesus can we find forgiveness. Yes, we find the forgiveness of Jesus Christ communicated to us through His Body, both at the Lord’s Table and in our daily lives, but there is no other source of forgiveness than the Lamb of God.

 

I was once part of a large audience who heard a well-known author and speaker preach on our need to forgive ourselves. At the end of the message the pastors were called to come up front to minister to those who desired prayer. As I stood facing the audience, I looked at the pastor who was standing beside me and said, “You know, this business of forgiving ourselves isn’t true.”

 

He said, “Yes, I know.”

 

When a man came up to us for prayer regarding things in his life for which he was seeking forgiveness, we explained to him that lasting forgiveness was only to be found in Jesus and received from Jesus. The man was relieved to hear this and we had a sweet time of ministry and prayer with him…all centered in Jesus Christ.

 

If we have “truly experienced God’s costly grace” then we can display that costly grace to others, both within and without the visible church-community. Saints are those who both receive and give God’s costly grace. Saints forgive one another without ceasing. Saints are those who have been sanctified and are being sanctified. This sanctification is both individual and communal, and there cannot truly be individual sanctification outside of the Body of Christ – O how we need one another!

 

Perhaps our congregations ought to always be asking, “How is Christ sanctifying us in this season of life?”

 

We ought not to lose sight of Galatians 5:16 – 24, while our focus is on the fruit of the Spirit, let us not be so foolish as to dismiss the deeds of the flesh – Jesus our Lord was tempted, we will be tempted, only the foolish dismiss the reality of temptation (1 Cor. 10:1 – 13). We are to run to Jesus in temptation, our Great and Merciful High Priest (Heb. 4:14 – 16; 7:25; 2:17 – 18).

 

Might it not be that much of our practice of “church” these days is in the form of accommodation to the world, the flesh, and the devil? That rather than calling the people of the world to know Jesus and to be conformed (as believers) to His image (Rom. 8:29), that we are conforming ourselves to the present age? That our salt is losing its flavor, that we are putting our light under a basket, and we are shutting off the light on the city on the hill (Matt. 5:13 – 15)?

 

These things can be subtle, especially when we have acclimated ourselves to them. Yes, they can also be blatant, but I think subtlety is our primary danger, the soothing siren song of the world, the music that takes us away from the Christ of the Cross and the Cross of Christ. I imagine that this temptation exists in every life, in every congregational setting – it will usually look attractive, it will usually make sense – and it will always move our hearts away from Jesus and His Cross.

 

Galatians 2:20; 6:14.

 

Is this our testimony?

 

Is it the testimony of our congregations?

 

Chet Bitterman - Called to Die

 

Tomorrow, March 7, 2026, marks 45 years since Chet Bitterman, 28 years old, husband and father of two children, was killed for Christ in Columbia on March 7, 1981.

 

Before Chet and his wife Brenda began their mission with Wycliffe Bible Translators, Chet had written, “I find the recurring thought that perhaps God will call me to be martyred for Him in His service in Colombia. I am willing.”

 

Chet was kidnapped by Colombian terrorists on January 19, 1981, and held hostage until he was killed on March 7.

 

The following is from the Voice of the Martyrs (link below):

 

Negotiations went on in fits and starts. Brenda and her two young daughters—one barely old enough to walk—waited and prayed and hoped. They prayed Bitterman would remember the Scriptures that he had faithfully memorized. The guerrillas maintained their stance that Wycliffe must leave; Wycliffe agreed to leave when their translation work was done, more than a decade into the future. His captors released a letter from Bitterman. His words carried not discouragement and worry, but an exciting sense of mission and possibility:

 

The Lord brought 2 Corinthians 2:14 to mind: “But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph through the Lord Jesus Christ.” The word for “triumph” was used for the Roman victory parades, when the soldiers were received back at home by the cheering crowds after a successful battle…I have had a lot of free time to think about such things as Daniel’s three friends…and Paul and Silas’ experience in the jail at Philippi. In the case of Daniel’s friends, God did something very unusual through His power for a specific purpose, so that through everything, all concerned would learn (i.e., have their misconceptions corrected) about Him. The result of the experience was that everyone learned who He was. Remember Paul and the Praetorian Guard. Keep this in your thoughts for me. Wouldn’t it be neat if something special like this would happen?

 

Brenda was thrilled to see that her prayers were being answered. Bitterman was remembering the Scriptures. Even as he was held hostage, the Lord’s work was being accomplished. Colombian media reports about Wycliffe’s work included reference to the Gospel message and shed a positive light on Christian workers. Bible verses Bitterman had mentioned in his letter were printed in Colombian newspapers. The Word was going out. On the morning of March 7, forty-eight days after Bitterman’s abduction, his life was ended by a bullet to the chest. His body was left on a bus.

 

Stories of Christian Martyrs: Chester A. "Chet" Bitterman III - Stories

 

Called to Die, authored by Steve Estes, is Chet and Brenda’s story, it is also Christ’s story. I was given Called to Die by a friend who was a member of Chet’s Wycliffe team in Columbia, a friend of Chet’s who lived through the 48 days of agony that Chet was a hostage…and a witness. I write that my friend “lived through the 48 days,” but perhaps I should have written, “he lived and died and continued living and dying.” You see, my friend was never the same – the trauma had a lasting effect. (I am avoiding details out of respect for privacy).

 

Somewhere Oswald Chambers wrote that we argue with God about the effect our obedience will have on others, about the price others will pay if we are obedient to Him. Did not Mary the mother of Jesus pay a price for Jesus’ obedience? Did not a sword pierce her soul?  

 

We read of Jesus, “He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon Him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted” (Isaiah 53:2 - 4).

 

I think my friend continued to carry the sorrow and grief of Chet and Brenda Bitterman in his soul. I think he continued to fill up in his life “what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions” (Col. 1:24). O yes, he rejoiced in Chet’s testimony. Yes, he rejoiced in Christ Jesus the Resurrection and the Life. Yes, he believed that whoever believes in Jesus will never taste of death. Yet my friend also knew the koinonia of Christ’s sufferings (Phil. 3:10).

 

My friend was a brother who “showed up” when you needed someone. There were times he was the only one who showed up in an outreach I was doing. I knew as I traveled to a ministry venue for outreach that even if no one else would be there, that my friend would be there waiting for me.

 

If you meant my friend you would probably not be impressed; he was quiet, thoughtful, and self-effacing. Out of his suffering and sorrow, he had deep insights and a love for Jesus and others, and deep compassion. Because he didn’t fit the mold of a public speaker and preacher, congregations missed out on hearing him.

 

You may have never thought about this, but in reading Isaiah’s description of Jesus, neither you nor I may have been attracted to Him. In fact, we may very well have despised Him.

 

Nor may you have thought about Paul this way. Yet Paul writes, “I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling” (1 Cor. 2:3).

 

What has happened to us in the West that we have turned Jesus and Paul into high gross charismatic leaders, placed them in slick marketing programs, clothed them with our own agendas, and attempted to make them acceptable to both the professing church and the world? Are we ashamed of the shame associated with Christ and the Cross?

 

What has happened to us that we preach a “gospel” that is other than denying ourselves, losing our lives, and living totally and completely for Jesus Christ and others? (Mark 8:34 – 38). Do we not realize that we are all “called to die”?

 

I well recall the vice-presidential debate during the 1992 election. There were three candidates on stage, Al Gore, Dan Quayle, and Admiral James Stockdale. Of the three, Admiral Stockdale seemed out of place. He was not well spoken, he did not have a “presence,” he did not project himself well. Many American viewers wondered what he was doing on stage.

 

Yet, of the three (and meaning no disrespect to Mr. Gore or Mr. Quayle), Admiral Stockdale had a character tired in the fire of over 7 years as a POW in North Vietnam – torture was routine, his leg was broken twice. James Stockdale had paid a deep and heavy price in service to the United States of America – looks and presentation can be deceiving. We can be so superficial…yes?

 

When we lived in Massachusetts, Vickie made the acquaintance of Elisabeth Elliot who opened the door of hospitality to women associated with Gordon – Conwell. Her husband Jim, along with four other young missionaries, was killed while attempting to share the Gospel in Ecuador on January 8, 1956. Jim Elliot wrote, “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.”

 

On our office wall at home is a derivative of Jim’s quote, “Let us give what we cannot keep, to gain what we cannot lose.”

 

This is how Jim and Elisabeth Elliot lived.

 

This is how Chet and Brenda Bitterman lived.

 

This is how my friend and his wife lived.

 

This is how Paul lived.

 

This is how Jesus Christ the Son of God lived while on earth.

 

Is this how we are living?

Revelation - Letter to a Friend (4)

 

 

This morning I had a decision to make, it is a decision I make every morning, sometimes it’s easier to make than others – especially if I want to know who won a March Madness game or a World Series game. It was not so very difficult to make this morning (March 3, 2026), most mornings I don’t even think about it; this morning I didn’t think much about it. What is this decision?

 

Shall I first seek Jesus in His Word, in the Holy Bible through the Holy Spirit; or will I read the news…the news which is transient, fleeting, and ephemeral? Shall I read the Bible, which never deceives, or the news of man which deceives as a matter of nature? Shall I seek that City whose Builder and Maker is God, or will I allow myself to be seduced by the city of fallen man?

 

Darrell W. Johnson (Discipleship On The Edge, page 21) makes a statement that I think embodies a challenge for many Americans when reading Revelation:

 

“It turns out that, although the seven churches of Asia to whom Revelation was first addressed (1:4) were facing varying degrees of persecution, the greatest danger was not the persecution itself (and it never really is), but rather spiritual complacency. That is, believers were uncritically benefiting from the seductive riches and might of “Babylon,” which at that moment in history was Rome. (As we shall see in our study of Revelation 17 – 18, “Babylon” has taken on many different expressions throughout history.) The last book of the Bible calls us to a radical discipleship, to all-out courageous loyalty to the Lamb in a world “feverishly worshipping the beast.”” (Italics mine).

 

Our challenge in America is not simply spiritual complacency; it is a refusal to consider what Babylon looks like in our own time in history. It is unwillingness to read Revelation 17 – 18 and look in the mirror. We have been so indoctrinated by the Imperial Cult, and our syncretism is so ingrained within us, that we cannot imagine that the prophet Nathan would say to us, as he did to David, “Thou art the man!”

 

This reminds me of something I have experienced on Sunday mornings and in small group after small group. People often come up to me at the conclusion of Sunday worship and say, “Pastor, people need to hear what you’ve said this morning.” They seldom say, “I needed to hear that.”

 

In small groups, one of the greatest challenges is for the group to look in the mirror when reflecting on a Bible passage. The tendency is to talk about how others measure up to the passage, not how the passage challenges us to obedience to Jesus Christ. This tendency is so ingrained that when I, or someone else, reminds a group to look away from others and look into the mirror of the Word, that within minutes the group has turned away from the mirror once again and is looking at others and not themselves. Jesus desires to reveal Himself to us through His Word, we want to turn away from His gaze, away from the One whose “eyes are like a flame of fire” (Rev. 1:14).

 

Johnson reminds us that “Babylon has taken on many expressions throughout history.” If we read Revelation as being in the future, as always in the future, then we will not think as Johnson thinks, nor will we understand Revelation. Revelation was written to Christians to reveal Jesus Christ and to show them (as opposed to “telling” them about) present realities. Yes, it does indeed have unfolding reality within it, just as it has transcendent portrayals – dancing backward and forward through time and space and upwards into the heavens.

 

As Johnson writes, Revelation’s “imagery sustains the new vision of reality” (page 22).

 

Johnson also points out that since Revelation is a prophecy, that it means that Christ is calling the seven churches to an immediate response, to “some new form of obedience to his will” (page 25). “The heart of biblical prophecy is not, “look what is coming,” but “thus says the Lord” (page 25).

 

When we have been seduced by eschatological constructs and systems that move our center from Jesus Christ to examining the entrails of news and aligning ourselves with political, economic, cultural, military, and other systems of a world in rebellion against God (Psalm 2, Daniel 2), then we cannot see or consider the possibility that we just might not only be living in Babylon, but that we might be enabling and propagating Babylon – incorporating Babylon into our churches, teaching our people the ways of Babylon and the Beast, offering our children to the gods of this age.

 

Jesus said to the church in Sardis, “You have a name that you are alive, but you are dead” (Rev. 3:1). To the church in Laodicea He said, “Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire…” (Rev. 3:17 – 18).

 

We may look good by the world’s measure, but sick and pitiful in the light of Christ. Jesus speaks the truth to us because He loves us and because our Good Shepherd wants to deliver us from Babylon, just as He delivered Israel from Egypt.

 

Our danger is not persecution. I will go farther than Johnson, while complacency is a danger, active participation in Babylon and in the system of the Beast is a greater danger, trading the name of the Lamb, the Father, and the Holy City for the image and name of the Beast is a greater danger than complacency in America today. (Rev. 3:12; 14:1 – 5; 22:1 – 4; 13:11 – 18; Daniel 3).

 

Francis Schaffer thought that “personal peace and affluence” would be the great dangers to the American and Western church at the end of the 20^th century, I don’t think even he could see that it would lead to seduction in the arms of Babylon.

 

How can we possibly read and respond to Revelation if Jesus isn’t everything to us? If He isn’t everything then He is nothing. We are either “following the Lamb wherever He goes” or we are following some form of the enemy and the world – overtly or covertly.

 

Let us remember, our enemy is typically not something that looks evil, but that which looks quite good (Genesis 3:1 – 6; 2 Cor. 11:1 – 4).

 

“Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever” (1 John 2:15- 17).

 

Are we following the Lamb, and only the Lamb?