Peter’s Step of Faith

I had set myself a small project to look up the references to “The Kingdom of Heaven” or the “Kingdom of God”, in the Book of Matthew (the first book in the New Testament). As so often happens with this type of project, you start with one objective and end up seeing something else.

Anyway, I was reading the passage in Chapter 14 and story of Pete and Jesus walking on the water a few weeks ago (verse 22) [click for link].  For those of you unfamiliar with this passage (and I assume that really this is none of you), I shall attempt to summarise.

Jesus had just finished feeding the five thousand, starting with only five loaves and two fish, ending up with 12 baskets of leftovers – You must know that story. His disciples got into a boat to go to the other side, but Jesus decided to take a short cut, by walking across the lake – yes – you remember it now, don’t you.

Peter, on seeing Jesus, decided that it might be a pretty cool idea to join Jesus on the water. So naturally, (cutting a long story short), he stepped on to the water, promptly found himself up to his knees in water. Peter cried out for help, whereupon Jesus took him by the hand and they returned to the boat.

The usual thoughts on this are a mixture of limited amount of praise for the initial act of faith. Actually to me it looks on the surface like an act bravado or stupidity? – How would you have advised him to do this, if he had asked your opinion? “Oh yes – this sound like a pretty good idea – let’s all drown”.

It is not clear to me what Peter’s motivation was and I do not recollect having heard any ideas on this. Whatever it was, it was an individual one. Perhaps he had been drinking too much Galilean coffee and had a caffeine rush. Perhaps he was just plain impulsive (and there is some evidence that his character was of this nature). Perhaps it was just something that he wanted to do.

Perhaps he wanted to put Jesus to the test to see if his faith in Jesus was really justified. Peter might trust Jesus, but could he trust himself to know what he should do here?

But Peter’s motivation in leaving the boat was not initially my central observation. Rather it was the view we have formed of Peter’s cry for help, on seeing what he can got himself into.

Commentators are very patronising about Peter in this story. He cried for help, when he saw the wind and waves after which he began to sink. I was struck by the commentary in my bible, which said that Peter had only “beginning faith”, whatever that means. (I don’t like the commentary in my bible anymore – If “Beginning Faith” means that you step out on to the water in the middle of the storm, this will do for me).

Well, of course, he began to sink and had the water up around his knees. There was a storm going on. And of course, he cried for help. What was he supposed to do? (“Jesus, I think that I am going to drown, but that’s fine by me”). Even if he had been looking direct at Jesus (which is the normal lesson of this story), he would still have seen the waves.

My thought here is that he sank or at least thought that he was sinking, not because of lack of faith – whether he sank or not was Jesus’ doing. The extent or lack of his faith was shown in his response, in crying ”Oh Lord, save me”. Is this a good cry or not? Is it an example to follow or not? Did this show faith or lack of it? If he had had more faith, then what would his response have been?  Would a man of more faith have been silent?

But I have been here before [click here] with another story involving storms.

But back to the opening point. Why did he do this in the first place? His motivation was probably a combination of a number of the possibilities that I put forward. And what equivalent events is this meant to represent in our lives? If Peter was just putting Jesus to the test, it seems that there is little to be learned from this. Equivalent might be: “I think that I will run across this motorway to see what happens”. Putting God to the test for its own sake was something for Jesus rebuked the Devil in the temptations in the wilderness.

But putting God to the test for something that has purpose or meaning is another question. We could wait for God to tell us what to do. Sometimes we need out own convictions to show us where to go. But we worry (not unnaturally) that I might be wrong (“The waves”). Suppose that I have deceived myself (“The wind”).

The decision was Peter’s. He had the conviction and the (beginner’s!!??) faith to do this, and despite the wind and the waves, Jesus kept him and brought Peter back to the boat.

Two Thousand Years is a Long Time

I am going to take another diversion, to add yet another blog in between my Core Beliefs and to build the suspense. This time, I am going to tread on unusually dangerous and uncertain territory.

The thoughts / problems of unfulfilled prophecies had been running around in my mind (as well as the more general sludge that swirls around inside my head). Prophecy, whether fulfilled or unfulfilled is an interesting pastime for many. What would it like to be able to tell the future?

It could be for gain, to know the stock-market, or the results of horseracing, or out of curiosity about one’s own life (not a good idea in my opinion). Even if not taken seriously, it is a way of passing some time around the dinner table.  There is a whole industry of horoscope telling, fairground fortune tellers, astrologers and others with which I am not familiar or knowledgeable, except to ignore or steer clear of them. (Is Mystic Meg still around?)

I could also imagine a sense of power over others in knowing the future, especially when it concerns disaster. The image of the windswept Prophet in the desert, announcing doom and destruction, is a powerful one. (Have you noticed that they are never skinny weedy types and normally very hairy, so no chance for me here).

The Bible has its own history of prophecy, quite naturally. Well, what would you expect? God uses his prophets to speak to His people and to other nations of the consequences of their actions. On occasions, specific events are foretold (Isaiah and Cyrus). In other cases, passages in the Old Testament are used to demonstrate general prophecies about the life and nature of Christ.

In the New Testament, Christ talks about his Second Coming, a time when He comes again, to call His people and when all men will see Him. After this comes the end of earth and the end of time.

Christ told his disciples that they would see this happen in their lifetime. The letters written by Paul and other apostles reinforce this same point. This was something they should expect and for which they should prepare before they die. Christ describes some of the events that will occur in the Last Days. 

Throughout the last two thousand years, books have been written interpreting historical events, past and present, to show how the Second Coming is imminent. The Church teaches that these events are about to happen. Furthermore, we are to act in accordance with this and Christ himself taught his followers to live as though He were about to come again.

So have the Christians of the last two thousand years been living under a deception? We are instructed to believe something that is not going to happen, in order to have a reason to behave in a particular way. This certainly seems like a deception, even if it is for good reason. And most Christians do not seem to worry about this, because it is believed that this time it really is going to happen. The political “Signs of the Times” and general world chaos are seen as pointing this way.

So as you might have guessed that this blog puts forward an alternative proposition on prophecies and leans in a different direction (But of course, in keeping with Grumpy’s brother’s general policy, without conviction). It is not the thought of whether it really is going to happen this time that occupies me. It is rather that if Christ (or a prophet in another part of the Bible) makes a prophecy which did not come true for a particular generation, then what is the purpose of that part of the Bible?

If Christ’s prophecy about His second coming has been valid for every generation of the last 2,000 years, then these stories could have an alternative and direct meaning, unless it was always Christ’s intention that people should believe something that was not going to happen in their lifetime.  

To put it another way, a part of the New Testament might look like a prophecy about the last days. These events might or might not happen in my lifetime, but if they do not, then the passage must have some other meaning, an alternative meaning for me, to use in my lifetime. Perhaps it is about the immediate future or even the present.

Christ often misled his listeners, even his own disciples. “Beware the leaven of the Pharisees”, he said, leaving his listeners reeling in confusion about the subject matter, and making them feel ignorant for not understanding what he meant. I will not repeat here what I wrote in the Blog “Changing the conversation” [click forlink]

So what are we to make of Jesus’ prophecies on end of the world?  Matthew 24, 25 [click for link]  It hasn’t happened, but the passage has some relevance. Assuming that we are not intended to act on a deception, the story of Christ coming again with his angels (for example) must have some current meaning for us.

What that meaning is, is for us to find out.  Perhaps He has already come and we were just looking in the wrong direction?

 

Is the work that we do for God special?

I wonder what people make of St. Paul or how would they describe him? A tireless and energetic missionary and worker for God, perhaps. In our minds, we might put him at the top of a league table of Christian Saints. Perhaps there is a special place in heaven for him and others like him, near to God’s seat. We certainly admire his work. He seemed to have limitless energy, always on the move, preaching both to the Christians and non-Christians. He was always looking for new countries and places where God’s word had not been preached, and he himself boasts (albeit in an ironic sense) of his achievements. Even when imprisoned, he preached to his guards.

As if that were not enough, he wrote many of the letters of the New Testament (some of which were written while in prison), which expressed and crystallised the doctrine of being righteous before God by having faith in Jesus Christ. 

There will be other Christians, whose work we may admire. Some of these may be historical figures, who took Christianity to a new land or founded an order.

They may still be alive, perhaps people from our own church or simply well-known Christian figures. We admire these people. They might be given as example of lives to be copied and we may have been encouraged to emulate them.

Most of our lives are much more humdrum. Families, spouses and partners, children, mortgages, jobs, money, children’s education, trips to doctors and so on. We feel disheartened when we simply do not have the time, energy or motivation to do what is necessary to emulate these examples that have been given to us. Perhaps we even feel a sense of guilt that we should be doing something else. Or perhaps we feel that we should be sacrificing more time and money to God’s work and we stand accused by our consciences and by the Bible, the very book that is meant to encourage us.

I am not sure exactly how we arrive at this point. The Old Testament lay very few obligations on the People of Israel, except to love and obey Him, although, having said that, they were largely incapable of doing even these two things.

The New Testament seems to lay more specific obligations on Christ’s followers. Go and spread the Good News is a command of Christ to his followers, and the Letters of the Apostles lay down a number of regulations for Church and Christian life.

We take these to heart and feel the constant inadequacy of our own efforts, through the distractions of daily life, despite the knowledge of forgiveness.

I am not sure why feelings of guilt and inadequacy form such a large part of the thinking and emotions of the Church or at least the protestant church. I suppose as sin, judgement and repentance forms such a large part of the protestant church’s message and teaching, it is hardly surprising that we regard ourselves in this way.

So how is all this measured “at the end of the day” (as footballers say as a standard phrase) and anyway, does God regard work done in His name more highly than that done by, well, a Banker?

As a different but related question, is the relationship closer between God and one of his people where that person is doing God’s work?

I need to declare a personal interest here. I am from the banking profession, which is now regarded, with some justification, by the general public and press, as something not far removed from the mafia or prostitution. Being concerned solely with money, the very substance of the “world”, it is about distant from God’s work as can be done, even when it is being done legally.

So after all the weighing up and “refining” has been done, how does God assess the value of work? Certainly the work done processing banking customers’ orders and improving the operational flows of my area doesn’t seem to score highly on this score.

Perhaps the purpose of our secular lives is to provide context in which we find God. We find Him in the humdrum or at least, Gods reveals himself to us in the humdrum. If this is the case, then this humdrum stuff is pretty important. We can look for God in the day-to-day. God is to be found in the “world” (perhaps even in banking).

Finding God in the world has one major difference over finding Him in religious activity. It is just you and Him. There is no “spiritual” noise or second hand religious views.

But exactly what He says to us is for us to find out, but only if we listen.