Introspection: A convincing apologetic

A Christian need not be a well-read scholar to justify his faith. Although there is plenty of evidence supporting theism, the Bible, and historicity of Jesus, one need not be familiar with that evidence to honestly and rightly conclude Christianity is The Way.

Take the following example:

The most targeted area of attack on Christianity is the creation account in the book of Genesis. As many Christians will agree, it seems too elementary and mythological. How could the heavens and earth and all its creatures have been created in seven days? Why does modern archeology suggest the earth is so much older than what the Bible seems to suggest? What of the dinosaurs? Where did they come in? If the Bible is truly God’s inspired Word (Verbal Plenary Inspiration) why does it seem to contradict what modern science has hypothesized?

First, allow me to propose there are many scholarly and Biblical answers to these questions – that’s where good Christian apologetics come it. But one need not look at all the external and scholarly sources to draw a logical conclusion in favor of Christianity. There are plenty of theories in harmony with Genesis 1-2 that explain reasonable possibilities. For example, it is important to know that the thesis of Genesis is not to provide a scientific answer to man’s origins. This was not God’s purpose in providing the Genesis account. God did not aim to scratch the intellectual itch of all the skeptics by answering how the universe was made, and how long it took. Were this His purpose, I suppose we would have gotten way more than what we bargain for. Instead, His purpose was two-fold: (a) to introduce himself as the One supreme creator, and (b) to wake up humanity to its spiritual ruin based on the fall of its first parents. Details and time of creation are not the point of Genesis or the Bible. The point is our redemption.

But knowing things like this isn’t what inclined me to trust the Bible. When I came to believe, I did not first look at all the academic evidence before believing, (and there is sufficient evidence). I did not consider things like the dinosaurs. But even if I had looked at all the arguments against the truth of Christianity without knowing favorable arguments, it would not have altered my course (1). I did not need the secondary source of authority when I had the primary source of experience. And this experience I’m talking about is accessible to every person – namely, the fact that something is obviously wrong in oneself and the world.

Here’s what I mean. All of us (at an early age) come to find the world is not always a just and morally fair place. We find there are people who will steal from others; there are those who hate and murder based on ethnicity; spouses commit adultery; women, and even men are raped; and we find genocide in our history books, (and many find themselves the victim of these things). So we all come to the simple conclusion, based on first-hand experience, that something is not right, not just. As many apologists will point out, we get this idea of justice and morality from an authority above man, namely God. Were naturalism true, Christians argue there would be no moral instinct and no impulse to label some things as honorable (such as charity) and other things as despicable (such as avariciousness). After all, aren’t we all appealing to a higher standard when we say, “that’s not fair”? Who determines what is right and wrong if not God? And where did we get the instinct if he did not put it in our hearts? If this realization were enough to convince a person to believe in God (and ultimately Jesus,) then nearly everyone would be a theist. It took a step further to convince me. It took self-examination.

Any person who will look honestly at his own heart will find there is something seriously wrong on the inside. Any honest man will admit he has frequently violated the standard of conduct he expects from other people. The alcoholic knows his drinking is harmful, but continues to do it; the thief will protest when he himself is stolen from; the unfaithful husband does not like to find his wife being had by another man; the liar wants the truth from others. These are simple examples, but the human heart is very complicated and every person is guilty of failing to be what they themselves believe is right and good. C. S. Lewis put it best: “All men alike stand condemned, not by alien codes of ethics, but by their own, and all men therefore are conscious of guilt” (2).

This is what brought me to my knees in horror and disgust. After wondering for years why there is so much madness, pain and injustice in this world, a look inside at my own heart revealed the very problem was inside me. I could no longer smugly point out the evils of this world without introspection revealing myself to be one of the culprits. When one looks in the mirror and sees a loathsome mess, despair is a common reaction. Who wants to be foul? An even further discouragement was a realization I was helpless to change. Many a religious person has attempted, through personal effort, to bring about an internal change only to make a devil of himself with hypocrisy. You can clean the junk out of a river, but if that junk is welling up from the source, it will ever be dirty.

But I looked into my heart and found ugliness and corruption there; and further, I found no effort of my own would change it. So what if behavior can be altered – when the source is contaminated, no man (save One) can change it, because it would require a new source. A plant cannot uproot itself – something outside the plant must do the uprooting. When I realized this about myself, I found no other religion offered a satisfactory answer to the problem. Hinduism claims sin comes from ignorance and we must simply become enlightened. Buddhism claims the problem is desire, and we must starve our desire to be happy. Islam agrees with Christianity about sin, but in Islam, one must do penance – no substitute or regeneration is offered. These three major religions basically expect the plant to uproot and replant itself in “good” soil – and this is impossible. Only the Judeo-Christian position provides a way for a person to be properly reunited with its creator; because we need something on the outside to come in and wrench the source of evil (our hearts) out of us. Only the heart’s maker can change the heart. Only something higher and uncreated can suck the poison out of a man’s heart, and even then, the act is a thing that kills. Ripping the root of evil from a heart tears it asunder and kills the man. That is why only God can do it – because it requires one to be brought back to life again to make it through the ordeal. Thus, it is a miserable affair, but a necessary one. As Tozer put it, “The ancient curse … must be extracted in agony and blood like a tooth from a jaw. … There must be a work of God in destruction before we are free. We must invite the cross to do its deadly work within us” (3)

This is why no amount of rhetoric and evidence will convince a man to follow Christ. If God doesn’t do the calling (John 6:44), all one can do is alter a little behavior, but the heart continues to produce rubbish. This is also why a man (like myself) can come to trust and believe without studying all the academic and historical evidence and theories. Although sufficient evidence to believe is there, that is not what causes people to trust. The heart is “deceitful above all things and desperately sick” (Jer. 17:9, ESV). A deceitful heart can and does tamper with evidence and draws convenient conclusions.

Redemption begins when the man recognizes the wretched condition of his heart and becomes undone by it. From the man’s perspective, to see the world as twisted and corrupt is troubling and discouraging; but, to see oneself as twisted and corrupt, this is unacceptable. He laments, “Something must be done!” This bad news is what makes the Good News of salvation so appealing. Jesus, the God Man, is the only person or thing that offers what we need. No other religious figure claimed to be without sin, and offered himself for the debt. No other religious figure literally resurrected from the dead in accordance with historical records. No other religion provides a thorough cleansing as a free and unearned gift.

When a man sees the corruption in his own heart, he needs no other proof that something has gone wrong. He sees himself as he knows he ought not be – as he want not be. The foul condition suggests a deviation from a proper condition – and only one Man offers a realistic restoration. When a person comes to this realization, Jesus is standing – waiting for the invitation to come in and do the deadly work – to crucify the heart. Only then will the painful process of regeneration begin. Although it is done for us (we don’t lift a finger,) it is frightening. It is so painful, I find myself praying, “God be gentle,” but the desire to be free from the filth is cause for the deeper petition, “but be thorough.”

1. Jesus is powerful and unrelenting when he calls someone. In John 12:32 he says he draws men to himself. One friend of mine who is an accomplished scholar told me the Greek word used for “draw” in that verse could also be translated “drag.”

2. Lewis, C. S. (1980). Mere Christianity.

3. Tozer, A. W. (1982). The pursuit of God. pp 29 & 43.

Strength Concealed by Weakness

Divine humility is a term created by C. S. Lewis when he could find no other words to express his experience with a God so massive, so powerful, yet who approaches humanity with modesty and gentleness. Allow me to juxtapose these two qualities: God opened his mouth and spoke the universe into existence. We don’t yet know the full size because we have never seen the end of it. So what we can see is what astronomers call the “Observable Universe.” The observable universe is so massive there’s nothing in our language that can summon the proper perspective, so we’ll deal with our galaxy, the Milky Way.

This image is an artist's rendering of our galaxy. It consists of more than 200 billion stars; and by conservative estimates our galaxy is about 100,000 light years in diameter. Let’s unpack this: Light travels more than 185,000 miles every second. A light year is the distance it would take an object to travel at light-speed for a whole year. So, if a person were to travel at 185,000 miles per second for 100,000 years, they might be able traverse the length of our galaxy. Okay, perhaps that’s a bit too long for us. Our galaxy is disk shaped, like Frisbee, so we might choose instead to pass through the width – that would only take 1,000 light years. In fact, if we were to scale our galaxy down to the size of one hundred miles in diameter, our solar system would be less than one millimeter in size.

In case this galaxy is too small for you to stretch your limbs, God has prepared extra space for us beyond our galaxy. In fact, astronomers confirm there are more than 80 billion other galaxies in the observable universe – this is just what we can see. And, that is not stars we’re dealing with mind you, but galaxies. The number of stars in the observable universe is uncountable, but astronomers estimate somewhere between 30 and 70 sextillion. That is 10 followed by 51 zeros times 45. According to Isaiah 40:26, God has a name for each one and calls them out by ranks.

The universe is only one example we can use to behold God’s greatness. We could have gone the other direction into, say, DNA and the billions of characters of organized code in only one strand. Suffice it to say, God is unfathomably awesome.

If we left our understanding of God at this, we couldn’t possibly find anything modest or meek about him. But Lewis experienced another side of God that leaves us breathless. By virtue of this unfathomable greatness, God is the one and only being that need not bother with anything or anyone. He has no need of anything. He is justified to do away with any creation that would dare to ignore or dismiss him. He is Mighty with a capital “M” and deserves all honor and respect. But this isn’t how he does business, and that is where the “Divine humility” comes in. He endures our insults and dismissals. As Lewis (1940) put it,

… it is a poor thing to strike our colours to God when the ship is going down under us; a poor thing to come to Him as a last resort, to offer up ‘our own’ when it is no longer worth keeping. If God were proud He would hardly have us on such terms: but He is not proud, He stoops to conquer, He will have us even though we have shown that we prefer everything else to Him, and come to Him because there is ‘nothing better’ now to be had. … It is hardly complimentary to God that we should choose Him as an alternative to Hell: yet even this he accepts. (p. 95-96)

What is it about God that motivates him to take such a humble approach toward us? This divine yet humble nature seems paradoxical, but it is very true to the Biblical concept of God’s character. John Milton must have had this Divine humility in mind when, in his Epic, Paradise Lost, he postulated the reason Satan had the audacity to strike a rebellion against the King of kings. Satan says, “but still [God’s] strength concealed/ Which tempted our attempt, and wrought our fall” (1.641-42). In other words, Satan miscalculated the strength of God because of His Divine humility, and felt it was possible to usurp the throne.

Perhaps this is why God hates arrogance – it is so unlike Himself. The Bible is clear God aims to make us more like Him. Thus we find ourselves encouraged to place ourselves last, sit in the lesser seat, be the servant, and consider others more significant than ourselves. I’m not saying he wants us to be self-defacing; but a healthy dose of self-forgetfulness would do us all good. For those of us who don’t get this, who persistently kick against the goads, God has, in His grace, provided a thorn. He would have us be great like Him, but the path to that greatness is through a weakness. This is why God afflicted Saint Paul with a "messenger of Satan to torment him" (2 Cor. 12:7), and why he chooses the “foolish in the world to shame the wise” and “what is weak in the world to shame the strong” (1 Cor. 1:27).

The man C. S. Lewis (1954) himself is a profound modern-day example. This man is arguably the most influential Christian writer of the twentieth century. He propped up the failing hearts of the Englishmen while their island was bombed in World War II, he wrote potent and effective books on Christian apologetics, he cleverly countered atheistic attacks on Christian faith, he produced insightful allegories in his series The Chronicles of Narnia, among other fiction, and he wrote numerous academic essays. Almost fifty years after his death he is probably the most-quoted Christian author, period.

But his impact on the Church was a result of a physical handicap. He was born with only a single joint in both thumbs, limiting his ability to work with his hands. This was cause for serious dismay and disappointment because he “longed to make things, ships, houses, engines” (p. 10). After repeated effort at creating and building, he admits turning from his “failures” in tears. It was “As a last resort ... I was driven to write stories instead” (p. 10, emphasis mine).

What path would his life have taken if God had given him normal joints like everyone else? The world would have lost out on his writing and reasoning and encouragement. Lewis displayed the wonder and wisdom of God in his writings. No doubt he prayed as a child for an operating pair of opposable thumbs! But God denied him this gift, and as a result he was driven to write! What he first saw as an affliction, and a serious weakness, God used for his greatest strength. This made Lewis' life a great example of what Jesus teaches: “My power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor. 12:9).

Let this be a reminder for you and me, that when failure is lodged in our path, when we find our abilities severely limited and wanting, it just may be those very weaknesses that God will use to display His might and glory through us. For God wields great and awesome power, but he conceals it with weakness. How much more would He have his children be that way as well?

References:

Lewis, C. S. (1940). The problem of pain. New York: HarperCollins.

Lewis, C. S. (1955). Surprised by joy. Orlando, FL: Harcourt

Milton, J. (2000). Paradise Lost. London: Penguin

The Reed and the Oak

There is a Jewish parable that dates back to the first century called the Reed and the Oak. In this parable, a thin reed and a giant oak tree grew up along side each other near a river.

Throughout their life span they each encountered the same weather conditions – but each responded differently to the same types of weather. As wind picked up and blew, the reed would bend and sway in response to the wind; but the oak remained erect and upright because of its great strength and deep roots.

During the course of time a great and horrible storm came upon the land. The gale-force winds were so strong, and the oak so resistant to its influence, that it was uprooted and blown over. The reed, however, survived because it bent down low to the ground, compromising its upright posture. Yet, because the reed was willing to go very low it survived. And because the oak would not budge, it was blown over. Dr. Moseley explained the moral of the parable: “There was nothing wish-washy or compromising about the oak. The reed on the other hand, would bend to the right or left, even with a slight breeze” (p. 23).

You see, the oak lost its life by refusing to compromise, but the reed could only save itself by continually bending to the will of the wind. First century Jews likely knew this parable well. Knowing it ourselves, we get a better understand of what Jesus meant when he said this about John the Baptizer: “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A Reed shaken by the wind?” (Matt. 11:7) the implied answer is “No! an oak!”

Jesus said this right after John sent a message to him from prison. By disassociating John with the reed, Jesus was comparing John to the oak in the parable. This statement was a tacit prediction of John’s upcoming death. John was strong, uncompromising with his faith, and his roots went deep. Therefore, when the horrible storm came, he would not bend as a reed, and as a result he would lose his life.

The lesson we take away from this is repeated elsewhere by Jesus in different words. If you are to be righteous, if you are to be a follower of Jesus, you must be prepared to lay down your life for the cause, because in many ways, that path requires us to be uncompromising to the world and its influences.

The idea is this: it is better to be an oak and lose one’s life, than to be a weak, and bending reed, and save it.

Reference:

Dr. Moseley, Ron. Yeshua; A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church. Baltimore, MD: Lederer, 1996.

Some Reasoning for Only One Way

One of the most common objections to our faith is the exclusiveness of Jesus. Skeptics will ask, “How can God be fair, making Jesus the only way to the Kingdom, when millions of people have lived and died without ever hearing of him?”

Without ever looking deep enough, people often reject Jesus as the only way to God, preferring to accept a pantheistic approach (many roads, one destination), because it seems more agreeable to them. They will call you closed minded and write you off as a shallow thinker. Be assured, however, there is good and diverse rationale, (that doesn’t nullify God’s justice) to the exclusivity of Jesus.

First none of us deserve to be saved. Humanity is broken and fallen. We have each rejected God and he would be fair and just in leaving us to our own vices. When we adjust our perspective this way, we understand there is tremendous grace in the fact that there is even one way back to him. It is a very ugly thing to be a criminal, and when offered an opportunity for acquittal, to sniff at it and respond, “This can’t be the only way.”

But why offer some people a chance to God and not others? If we ask this question we are limiting God – how can we know this is the case just because some people die without ever (allegedly) hearing the name of Jesus? God’s message of salvation is not limited to the single vehicle of human evangelism, (although he has made it clear it is to be the primary platform for the Good News). Jesus broke through directly to Saint Paul whose salvation came as a result from his message (Gal. 1:12). There are other places in the Bible where God spoke directly to Jews and pagans through visions, dreams, and even angels. Examples are Abimelech, Pharaoh and Balaam, not to mention the prophets. This is called the Universal Opportunity view. It rightly holds that God can save who he wants, when he wants, with or without our help. I’ve heard it put it this way: “The only thing that can thwart the desire of the omnipotent Creator to save all people, is their own unwillingness to be saved” (Boyd & Eddy 183). And I would even add that God could break through our unwillingness if he so desired. Jesus makes it clear that God chooses us and draws us to him – we don’t choose him (John 12:32, 15:16, Rom. 9:16).

Even if some people never get a chance to hear the salvation message we cannot call an all-knowing God unjust. Wouldn’t our God know if someone would respond to a message if they heard it? C. S. Lewis profoundly wrote, “I believe that if a million chances were likely to do good, they would be given … Finality must come some time, and it does not require a very robust faith to believe that omniscience knows when” (126). Those who would not respond to God remain in objection to him, whether they have had a million chances or zero – they remain who they are. The peculiar thing about those who are perishing is not their ignorance of God, but their ability to block him out of their lives. This is why Lewis said he believes “the damned are, in one sense, successful rebels to the end; that the doors of hell are locked on the inside” (130).

Another position is the Inclusivist View, which claims that Jesus is ontologically necessary for salvation, but not epistemologically necessary, (that is, Jesus is the only savior of humanity, but it is possible to attain salvation without explicit knowledge of him. It could mean people will be judged by how they respond to the limited truth they have, not the information they don’t have). This would account for all the people before Christ came, infant deaths, and people with mental disabilities. We see biblical support for this where Jesus welcomes those into the kingdom who did not recall, feeding him visiting him in prison, etc. (Matt. 25:36-40). Paul also wrote, “… we have our hope set on the living God, who is the savior of all people, especially those who believe” (1 Tim. 4:10). This implies God can save some of those who did not have a chance to believe.

For this reason, it would not surprise me to find some people in heaven who, although never heard Jesus’ name on earth, are perplexed to find they got there by the cover of his blood, without knowing the blood was at work in their life. This very thing happens in Lewis’s allegory called, The Last Battle. One of the antagonists, who worshiped what he thought was the True God, found himself in the afterlife confronted by the One True God. Shaken to find he was worshiping the wrong god all along, the man fell at the feet of the Glorious One and this scene unfolded:

[The man thought,] Surly this is the hour of death, for [The True God] will know that I served [the wrong god] all my days and not him. Nevertheless, it is better to see [The True God] and die, than to be [ruler] of the world and live and not to have seen Him.’ But The Glorious One bent down … and said, Son, thou art welcome. But I said, Alas, Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of [the wrong god]. He answered, Child, all the service thou has done to [him], I account as service done to me (517).

I left out much of the context of this allegory for the sake of brevity, but the point being made here is, God knows the hearts of men and he saves whomever he pleases (Romans 9). (This doesn’t relieve us the obligation to evangelize, for (a) we have been commanded to do it, and (b) it is better for communities to live knowing Jesus, than live without knowing him.) Thus, it is offensive for us, as mere people, to be presumptuous enough to questions God’s methods of salvation. Anyone questioning Jesus as the only Way is likely not asking with purely philanthropic motives. Dr. David Stern astutely acknowledged that people “often raise the issue not out of concern for the ‘pitiful lost heathen’ but as a dodge to justify their own unbelief; the very form of the question assumes that God is unjust, and not worthy of their trust, that the ‘primitive tribesman’ is an innocent ‘noble savage’ and God the guilty party” (335). As we know, all men, (primitive or sophisticated) are not innocent, and God cannot be guilty.

This type of objection is likely the result of a straw man the unbeliever has set up, only to knock down. They don’t have the intent to take an objective look at the claims of Jesus in the first place. Those who may have some genuine concern for the un-evangelized must first decide how they will respond to the grace being offered to them, and let God worry about those who have not yet had the privilege of the message. You can be sure God is a better caregiver than they, and he has more concern for the un-evangelized than any other person. Once the skeptic has a life changing conversion, God may very well use him or her to reach those who haven’t yet heard the Good News.

References:

- Boyd, Gregory and Eddy, Paul: Across the Spectrum; Understanding the Issues in Evangelical Theology

- Lewis, C. S.: "The Last Battle" in The Chronicles of Narnia

- Lewis, C. S.: The Problem of Pain

- Stern, David: Jewish New Testament Commentary

The Messy Rebirth

Many doctors will agree the two most traumatic and frightening events in life are birth and death. These two physical activities are not romantic or graceful, but messy, painful and unflattering. There’s nakedness, blood, struggle and panic. As followers of Jesus, we do both at once. Therefore, the Christian walk is bound to be turbulent.

When we talk of being “born again” we often have in mind a quick event like that of a physical birth. We envision the event to happen in one (earthly) day, such as the day a Christian decides to believe. But the Bible refers to this rebirth as a process that unfolds here on earth. That is why Paul refers to those in Christ as being saved, and those who are not in Christ as perishing (2Cor. 2:15, ESV). And with this rebirth, comes the gradual death of our old selves (Matt. 16:24).

Thus these two heavy spiritual events are happening at the same time for the believer, a birth, and a death – no less messy than the physical counterparts. (An excellent allegory of this process is found in John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress.)

Here’s what I mean. When a person comes to understand his own wickedness, and realizes he needs help, the good news of Jesus is the beginning of new life for him. He will find that all his corruption and wrongdoings are wiped off his slate, and he gets a fresh start. This forgiveness results in the joy we know. We know life with the creator is unfathomable ecstasy, and the alternative to Jesus is guilt, shame, filth, wretchedness and crime. We sing because we don’t want to be dirty, but clean, and we have been cleansed. But, after time passes, the new believer will realize he is not yet finished dying to himself. He still has sinful impulses and often must bitterly resist a hunger to do wrong. If he gives to temptation, he is heartbroken. If he resists, he is perplexed and wearied. Life becomes an undulation of joy of salvation, and disappointment over fleshly desires. At times it can be difficult to rest in forgiveness when there is still the relentless desire to do wrong.

If you struggle through this kind of perplexing tension, you can be sure the work of salvation is in you. For, the beginning of rebirth is not self-gained perfection, but only the desire to be like Jesus and be good. If you have the desire, Jesus is working on you. We see Paul struggling with this very problem: “For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out” (Rom. 7:18). But our flesh is dying, and it won’t go down easily. It will cause us grief as long as we occupy our old husks. Many scholars believe Paul’s famous thorn in the flesh was a sinful impulse (2 Cor. 12:7). It agonized him so much he wouldn’t leave Jesus alone about it. The reply he got was, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness” (verse 9).

Thus we are faced with a beautiful phenomenon of God’s character: He wills us not to sin, but can use our dying flesh to perfect the rebirth we are experiencing. Although we may not fully know why God works this way, we can surely know he understands us, because he walked with us. Because of this, there is mercy enough when we stumble. As long as we hate the falling, we can be sure he will always be ready to help us back up. No one put it better than C. S. Lewis:

“[God] wants [his people] to learn to walk and must therefore take away his hand; and if only the will to walk is really there, he is pleased even with their stumbles” (p. 40).

Unfortunately, this rebirth is very unflattering. In involves becoming conscious of our own nakedness, helplessness, and weaknesses. We will wail, moan and cry. We’ll flail our pudgy spirituals limbs about. We'll need our diaper changed very often. But God will continue to care for this new creation of his. Because our desire is to be with him, he is happy to hold our hand until we can walk on our own in maturity, on the other side of this life.

Reference:

Lewis, C. S. The Screwtape Letters. New York: HaprerCollins, 1942.

The Healing Tallit

“And behold, a woman who had suffered from a discharge of blood for twelve years came up behind him and touched the fringe of his garment, for she said to herself, ‘if I only touch his garment, I will be made well’” (Matthew 9:20-21).

This quotation is packed with meaning and sentiment uncommon to our modern culture. First, it is easy to miss the gravity of this woman’s hemorrhage. In the first-century Jewish culture, it made her an outcast according to the Law. She was seen as dirty – people avoided her, (and the things she touched) because of her condition (1). This explains why she attempted to touch Jesus in secret, for she knew the Law said it would pass her unclean status to the rabbi (2).

But the significant part of the text is the specification of where she touched: the fringe of his garment. The word “fringe” is translated from the Greek kraspedon, which is “a tassel of twisted wool” (3). As an obedient Jew, Jesus is wearing the robe with “tassels on the corner of [his] garment,” required in Numbers 15:37-41. The corner of the garment, in Hebrew was called kanaph (כנף), which could also be translated as “wings” – hence Jews often referred to the corner of their outer garments as wings (4). The garment itself is called the tallit, which is still worn during ritual worship by observant Jews. Tassels are worn on the four corners of the tallit in fulfillment of Numbers 15 – these are called tzitzit and are considered holy because they represent the commands of the Law. According to Dr. Moseley, in Jesus time tradition held that the tzitzit (tassels) of the Messiah’s tallit (outer garment) would have healing properties. This likely had roots in Malachi 4:2, believed to be a reference to the Messiah: “But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings” (emphasis mine).

The bleeding woman would no doubt be familiar with that scripture and the tradition behind it. Her desire to be healed motivated her to touch the one place on Jesus’ garment (tzitzit/fringe), which would have healing properties if he was indeed the Messiah.

Here’s what we can take away: The woman (a) knew the scripture and (b) believed them. If she had not believed, she would not have risked public ridicule by making the rabbi unclean. Had she not known the scripture (and the scholarly interpretations) she would not have thought to touch the tzitzit. But it was her specific act of touching the tzitzit that demonstrated her faith in Jesus as the Messiah, (with healing in his wings). And Jesus clarified to her, that it was her faith in him (not so much the tzitzit) that actually healed her.

In the same way, our faith will bless us if we know the scriptures, and believe them.

NOTES:

1. Leviticus 15:19-25 gives us perspective of the plight of this woman. A woman who bleeds from her menstrual cycle was labeled unclean, and anything she touches would also become unclean – be it another person or object. It must have been a burden to remain this way for seven days – but twelve years without human contact would be misery. This would not only limit her interaction with people, but it prevented her from entering the Temple area and celebrating the holy festivals.

2. In his Jewish New Testament Commentary, Dr. David Stern notes, “normally the impure defiles the pure” (p. 38, citing Hag. 2:11-13 and the Talmud). In this case, however, the opposite occurred, the impure became clean. Realize the only other place this happens in scripture is Exd. 29:37. After seven days of consecrating the alter, it became “most holy” and “whatever touches the alter shall become holy.” We make a connection to the “most holy” alter and Jesus, who is most holy – when we touch him, (like the alter) he remains undefiled, while we are cleansed. Also, the alter happened to be the place where blood was spilled and sin was atoned for.

3. From Dr. Ron Moseley in Yeshua; A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church, p. 20.

4. This changes the way we visualize places in the Bible where God’s wings are mentioned. For example, “under his wings you will find refuge” (Psalm 91:4), and, “hide me in the shadow of your wings” (Psalm 178). Also, when the Jews pray under their prayer shall (tallit) they are considered under the protection of God’s wings.

Significance of Blood, Water and Spirit

There are good reasons Saint John reported water and blood flowed from Jesus’ side after the Roman soldier pierced him with a spear. The medical explanation is called pericardial tamponade – a condition usually resulting from major chest trauma.

Many NT scholars believe Jesus suffered from this condition in his final moments. Basically, it is a condition where water fills the sac surrounding the heart (called the pericardium). Since we know Jesus was flogged and beaten, this is where he could have suffered the chest trauma. Pastor Mark Driscoll, Marshill Church, said he believes it was either this, or that Jesus fell under his cross beam when he was carrying it. Cross beams could way more than 100 pounds (like a railroad tie) and would crush a man's chest if he fell under it. This would explain why John's gospel mentions Jesus carried his own cross, but the synoptic gospels claim Simon carried it. One could mend this surface contradiction by holding that Jesus began by carrying his cross beam, but weakened from his flogging, fell underneath the weight and was crushed, and from that point being unable to carry the beam, thus needing Simon's help.

With that kind of chest trauma, fluid would build around the heart causing massive heart failure and death. This would explain why blood and water came out when his side was pierced with a spear. This would also debunk the swoon theory, which states that Jesus merely passed out on the cross, and the Romans, (who were professional executioners) mistook him for being dead. If water came from his side, chances are he surely died from massive heart failure.

Here's why it was significant enough for Saint John to record it. Water and blood played significant roles in the ritual cleansing of a person. Baptism was a very common ritual, and the law required baptism for a number of situations. For example, a woman who finished her menstrual cycle would need to be immersed in water before being clean again. Another example is seen with the high priest, who was baptized five times before entering the Most Holy Place on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement).

Also, we know that blood atones for sin, and "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" (Heb. 9:22). In fact, in many cleansing rituals, blood and water were used together. For example, in order for a leper who had been healed, to be pronounced ceremonially clean, he needed to be (among other things) sprinkled with blood and water together, then baptized (Lev. 14:1-9, Heb. 9:19-20). The blood is necessary for atonement because the wages of sin is death, (Rom. 6:23) and the life of a creature is in its blood (Lev. 17:14). Water (I suppose) is significant because it is the one base substance needed for all kinds of cleaning – so blood for the life, and water for the cleansing. These things don't evoke very much imagery in our culture because we are so far removed from animal sacrifices (which required blood and lots of water). But to the first-century Jew, blood and water together evoked graphic imagery of death, substitution and purification. 1 John hammers on this: "This is he who came by water and blood - Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood" (5:6a). Additionally, water in the near east has always been a symbol of life. Consider that Jesus referred attaining eternal life through “living water” (John 4:14).

This is also why the Christian sacraments (baptism and communion) are symbols of water and blood. The third element is the Spirit, where Jesus will "baptize us in spirit and fire" (Luke 3:16). Further along in 1 John 5, the spirit is mentioned as the third witness (verses 6-9). So, water blood and the Spirit are major themes for us. One could even argue our baptism is a picture of the great flood from Gen. 6, and our immersion with the spirit a picture of how God will one day immerse the earth in fire (Rev. 8) - both having cleansing properties. We see all three elements at the cross right at the point of Jesus’ death. His last words were "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!" Then, water and blood flowed from his side. Water, blood, spirit.