Too guilty to pray.

There’s two kinds of guilt: The emotion, and the legal status. Today I’m talking about the emotion.

Not that there aren’t people who don’t bother to pray because of the legal status—because, they say, they’re far too evil to talk to God. Rubbish; the only thing really stopping ’em from talking to their Father, is their emotion, and probably their pride—they’re just so bad, God can’t abide them. That’s rubbish too.

’Cause if the devil, which is probably as pure evil as beings can get (though there are definitely some humans who give it solid competition) had no trouble talking with God, Jb 1.6-7 we all know God isn’t so holy he can’t interact with evil creatures. Jesus ate with sinners, remember? So much so, it bugged snobs.

So yeah, I’m writing about the emotion of guilt—that feeling you’ve done wrong and deserve chastisement for it. Tied together with it is the irrational fear God’s gonna chastise you, when you approach him: “How durst thou stand before me and speak unto me, thou filthy sinner? Half a mind have I to smite thee with shingles.” And visions of this angry KJV-speaking cosmic hairy thunderer dance through our fearful brains.

’Cause we completely forgot God is Jesus. Was Jesus this way towards people who approached him? No. (Well okay, he acted a bit racist towards this one Syrian, but that was likely a test. Mt 15.21-28) When we turn to God in prayer, he doesn’t blast us with wrath and anger. He confronts us like the father in the Prodigal Son Story:

Luke 15.20-24 The Message

20“He got right up and went home to his father.

“When he was still a long way off, his father saw him. His heart pounding, he ran out, embraced him, and kissed him. 21The son started his speech: ‘Father, I’ve sinned against God, I’ve sinned before you; I don’t deserve to be called your son ever again.’

22“But the father wasn’t listening. He was calling to the servants, ‘Quick. Bring a clean set of clothes and dress him. Put the family ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23Then get a grain-fed heifer and roast it. We’re going to feast! We’re going to have a wonderful time! 24My son is here—given up for dead and now alive! Given up for lost and now found!’ And they began to have a wonderful time.”

The son was feeling mighty guilty—but his father’s response was, “I have my boy back! Let’s party!” In a healthy relationship with a healthy father, your dad’s not gonna smack you around for screwing up; life will already do that aplenty. He’s just gonna love you, and be there for you. That’s God. That hairy thunderer?—that’s not a healthy father, ergo that’s not God. Stop letting that false image obstruct your relationship with God. Jesus describes his Father in his parable. That’s what we should expect—no matter how guilty we might feel.

“Wives, be subject to your husbands.”

1 Peter 3.1-7.

Just after Simon Peter addresses how household servants oughta live under difficult masters, next he deals with how wives oughta live under difficult husbands. And again, he’s speaking to people in a different culture, in the Roman Empire, where women lacked rights and couldn’t always escape their tyrannical spouses. They’d be suffering in the very same way a slave would under a despotic master. Does God care about them too, and have grace for them too? Of course he does.

And of course tyrannical spouses misuse this passage, and claim it justifies all their evil. It does not. Plenty of other scriptures warn ’em God doesn’t approve. Peter warns ’em too, in verse 7. In no way does any part of this passage negate those other passages, and in no way should you trust any pastor who suggests otherwise.

1 Peter 3.1-7 KWL

1Likewise you² women submitting

to your² own men

—and if a certain man doesn’t obey the word,

perhaps they’ll be won over without the word

through the lifestyle of their women,

2seeing their holy lifestyle

in fear.

3About them:

Don’t be externally like the world—

with elaborately braided hair,

decorated with gold,

or dressing in conspicuous clothing.

4Instead be like a private, thoughtful person,

looking into the incorruptible things

of a gentle, quiet spirit,

who is precious in God’s sight.

5For holy women who hope in God

lived this way at some point,

arranging themselves in submission

to their own men,

6like Sarah listened to Abraham

and calls him Master.

You² who do good deeds are her daughters,

and aren’t afraid of anything startling.

7You² men likewise—

living with your² women

with the understanding

that they’re like a weak utensil;

showing them honor

like they’re your² fellow heirs of living grace

—lest your² prayers be cut off.

I should remind you: Most bibles tend to translate women and men (Greek γυναῖκες/yinékes and ἄνδρες/ándres) as “wives” and “husbands.” Contextually, that’s usually what the New Testament authors meant. But not always. A patriarch was responsible for all the women of his house, whether they were married to him or not; this’d include unmarried sisters and daughters, widowed mothers-in-law, and any other family members under his protection, and of course household servants and slaves. They’d also be “his” women—and for the women, he’d be “their” man. They wouldn’t be married; they’d be in no sexual relationship (or at least they really ought not be!) but as the ruler of the family, they were expected to heed his authority and wisdom, and he was expected to take them into consideration and not act unilaterally. Did they always do this? Nah. Hence Peter’s need to remind ’em to do so.

Like most people dictating their letters, Peter uses some run-on sentences, out-of-place clauses, and forgets to use verbs. Makes translation and interpretation tricky—but not impossible! What he’s basically saying is: Christian women, be a good devout example for your crummy men. They may not listen to God’s word, but maybe despite this, they’ll listen to you; they’ll respect you, and be won over by your Christlike behavior. Hey, it’s been known to happen!

The Five Thousand try to crown Jesus.

John 6.14-15.

Right after Jesus and his students feed the 5,000 in the Galilee, this happens:

John 6.14-15 KWL

14So the people,

seeing the sign Jesus does,

are saying this:

“Truly, this is the Prophet

who comes into the world!”

15So Jesus,

knowing they are about to come and seize him

so that they might make him king,

goes back again into a mountain,

alone by himself.

The synoptic gospels also tell this story, but Mark and Matthew end it thisaway:

Mark 6.45 KJV

And straightway he constrained his disciples to get into the ship, and to go to the other side before unto Bethsaida, while he sent away the people.

Matthew 14.22 KJV

And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away.

Mark and Matthew don’t say why Jesus ordered his students to “straightway” (Greek εὐθέως/efthéos, “quickly”) get into the boat, but John certainly fills in that blank: The crowds believed the miracle of feeding an entire town’s worth of people with one boy’s lunch Jn 6.9 was a σημεῖον/simíon, a sign from God. In their bible, the last time somebody miraculously fed a massive crowd with bread was when Moses ben Amram led the newly-freed Hebrews into the wilderness, and the LORD fed ’em manna. And didn’t Moses say this?—

Deuteronomy 18.15-19 KJV

15The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 16according to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. 17And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. 18I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

The LORD goes on, describing a fake prophet in case anybody tries to pull a fast one on the Hebrews, Dt 18.20-22 and Christians really oughta memorize that passage, because many a fake prophet has successfully pulled some fast ones on us.

But even though people recognize (and are meant to recognize) the LORD is describing any prophet who steps up and says, “The LORD told me something,” Pharisees claimed this passage is also an End Times prophecy. At some point before the End, there’s gonna be a Prophet-Like-Moses who, just like Moses, is gonna rescue Israel from their enemies, take ’em back into the wilderness, and feed ’em manna.

Is Jesus this Prophet-Like-Moses? Yes he is. Simon Peter said so. Ac 3.20-26

Now, is he gonna do what Pharisees believed he’d do? Some of it. Definitely not all. Fr’instance he is gonna rescue Israel from its enemies… but he’s not taking Israel into the wilderness to feed ’em manna; there’s no need for that. Unless “feed them manna” is a metaphor for “teach them the word of God”—but again, there’s no need to take ’em into the wilderness for that.

In any event that’s the quandary Jesus now found himself in. Yes he’s the Prophet; no, he’s not gonna do that.

The Apostles Creed.

Whenever I bring up the Apostles Creed to Christians, I tend to get one of two reactions: Positive and negative.

The positive response tends to come from Christians who grew up in formal, liturgical churches. Most of ’em can recite the creed right along with me… though the version I memorized is the Book of Common Prayer version, and most of ’em tend to know one of the Roman Missal versions. There are minor wording differences, but it’s the same creed.

Third Day and Brandon Heath perform Rich Mullins’ “Creed.” Heath’s YouTube channel

If they didn’t grow up in such churches, or their churches never taught it to ’em, they might still know it. ’Cause they learned it as lyrics from a Rich Mullins song. Or someone else’s cover of that song. Or John Michael Talbot’s song, though that’s lesser-known.

Negative responses typically come from anti-Catholics who get weirded out whenever I dare bring up any form of ancient Christianity their churches never taught. They don’t see the point of creeds. Yet at the very same time, they’ll go on and on about the need for necessary foundational beliefs… which is precisely what creeds are.

The Apostles Creed (often spelled with an apostrophe; it doesn’t need one) is Christianity’s simplest, most basic creed. Here it is… in my translation from the Latin. As far as I can tell, the Latin’s the original.

I believe in God,

the Father, almighty, creator of heaven and earth.

And in Christ Jesus, his only Son, our master.

He was conceived by the Holy Spirit;

born from the virgin Mary.

He suffered under Pontius Pilate,

was crucified, died, and was buried.

He descended to the afterlife.

The third day, he was resurrected from the dead.

He ascended to heaven;

he sits at the almighty Father’s right hand.

From there he will come;

he is judging the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,

the holy catholic church,

communion of saints, forgiveness of sins,

bodily resurrection, and eternal life.

Amen.

A creed, like this creed, is a faith statement. Unlike the faith statements drafted by denominations and individual churches, creeds were written long before the Great Schism and denominational divisions—all the way back when Christians still considered ourselves only one church. Whenever preachers tried to pass off innovative ideas and hypotheses as authentic Christianity, and instead created division and disharmony, church leaders throughout the Roman Empire and the world would gather, discuss, check the scriptures, and write creeds to reflect the orthodox point of view. Every true Christian should be able to say the creeds and mean ’em. Only heretics get tripped up by them.

Tradition has it the Apostles Creed is the very oldest of the creeds—even that it was written by the Twelve. It’s certainly old, and consistent with other creeds, but the oldest full copy we have of it comes from St. Permin’s Dicta Abbatis Pirminii/“Sayings of Abbot Permin,” written after 710. It looks far more like it’s a short version of the Nicene Creed—probably drafted by someone who couldn’t remember the full creed, but could remember the basics.

Who runs the church?

Who leads the church? Short answer: Christ Jesus.

Way longer answer: When we Christians are asked who runs our individual churches, most of the time we talk about the leadership structure of our individual churches: The head pastor, the other pastors or pastoral team, the bishop, the elders, the board members. Sometimes we’ll describe the leadership structure of our denomination. But if you pinned us down, everybody should say the leader of our church is Jesus. He is the king over God’s kingdom, after all.

But since his kingdom isn’t yet of this world, Jn 18.36 the day-to-day duties of running Jesus’s churches on earth fall to vicars. Vicar is the Christianese word for “deputy,” and means the very same thing: Lieutenants who answer to the guy who’s really in charge, who’d be Jesus. Hopefully we truly are working on his behalf, and not for ourselves. Though I leave it to you as to how well we’re doing.

Now, if you were to ask your average pagan who’s in charge of a church, most of ’em assume the pastor is. (Or the minister, priest, father, sister, bishop, apostle, prophet—whatever you call the top dog.) And most of them, unless they grew up around non-cultish Christians, assume the pastor holds way more sway than they actually do. Depending on how cynical this pagan is, pastors range from benevolent dictators to selfish despots. To their mind, every church is some form of top-down tyranny.

And to be fair, a lot of churches do practice a top-down model. It’s the most common church leadership structure there is. Arguably it’s the first structure: Jesus in charge, and his students not. And once Jesus ascended to his Father, it was followed by the apostles in charge, and everyone else below them.

Of course I say “arguably” because some Christians argue this top-down structure isn’t Jesus’s intent. They’ll advocate for their own favorite structure—namely the structures we find in their churches. And yes, they have proof texts. If you think church oughta be a democracy, you’ll likely quote verses which prove God thinks so too. Top-down, bottom-up, middle-out, nobody-in-charge-but-the-Holy-Spirit, or even benevolent anarchy, people will point to verses which they’re entirely sure determine their view.

Regardless of those views, I’m gonna point out the top-down model is all over Christendom because it’s consistently found all over the scriptures. And all over human history, all over church history, and all over humanity. It’s our default setting. Left to our own devices, it’s how humans choose to run things: We either have the top-down model imposed upon us by a king or dictator, or we deliberately choose it and elect a mayor or president. ’Cause most of the time, it’s just the most efficient way to do things. Congresses take too long to hash things out—which is great when you intentionally want to draw out deliberations, like the American Founders did. But once you’ve finally determined what to do, you want a president to act upon it. You want a top-down leader.

Well, unless you’ve been burnt by too many top-down leaders, and wanna try something different. Hence some churches run that way.

But regardless, everybody pays lip service to the idea Jesus runs our churches. Hopefully we let him!

Too stressed to pray.

Since I was asked to write about being too stressed to pray, I’m gonna… but I admit my advice may be inadequate, because I don’t personally suffer from this problem. Whenever I’m stressed, my knee-jerk reaction is to pray.

Not hit things, not flee, definitely not drink or get stoned—pray. Whenever they’re in a jam, plenty of people immediately call out to God; even atheists will do this, even though they absolutely don’t wanna, even though they’re pretty sure nobody’s listening, because they were raised to do this. When I was growing up, the people around me were predominately Christian; when they were in a jam, they prayed. I mimicked them; I prayed too. And still do.

And I’m aware not everybody was raised Christian like me, so they didn’t develop this knee-jerk reaction. When they get stressed out, their first response is to do the other things I just listed. Punch the wall—but ideally some other, healthier form of physical expression, like going for a run; like going to the gym and hitting the heavy bag. I got a lot of alcoholics in the family, and I know they immediately turn to drink. I have coworkers who are stoned most of the time, and marijuana is how they deal with stress too. I had a friend in college who handled her stress by having lots of sex with her boyfriend. If you grew up with unhealthy methods of stress relief, stands to reason you’d turn to them in a crisis.

But once you become Christian, you gotta unlearn the unhealthy methods, and learn to turn to God.

So my recommendation? Practice turning to God whenever you’re dealing with small stressors. When little things bug you, remind yourself to pray. Pray like that regularly enough, and when the bigger things wallop you, prayer won’t be the last thing on your mind. It may not be the first—you’re working on it—but your reaction certainly won’t be, “Prayer? Who has the time? I’m dealing with a crisis here.”

(Oh, and go to the gym too. That actually works a lot better than you’d think.)

“Servants, be subject to your masters.”

1 Peter 2.18-25.

So here’s a passage which has been regularly misinterpreted and abused by people who want employees, subordinates, “servants,” and slaves to unquestioningly obey their masters. Whenever they wanted a proof text that’d get people to shut up and permit their own exploitation, they’d quote 1 Peter, and claim Simon Peter endorses their despotism. After all, the word the KJV translates “master” in verse 18 is literally δεσπόταις/despótes… so apparently Peter was fully aware these people were living under tyrants, and it was okay with him.

It wasn’t, and I’ll explain. First, the passage.

1 Peter 2.18-25 KWL

18Those of a household submitting

in all fear, to the boss—

not only to the good and reasonable bosses,

but also the crooked ones—

19this receives grace,

if it’s because of an awareness of God

when someone who is wrongfully suffering

undergoes grief.

20For how is it glory

if sinners will undergo being beaten?

But if do-gooders will undergo suffering,

this receives grace from God.

21For this is why you² are called;

for Christ also suffers for you² all,

leaving you² an example

so you² might follow his steps—

22Christ who “doesn’t sin,

nor is deceit found in his mouth.” Is 53.9

23Christ who, being disrespected, doesn’t disrespect back;

suffering, doesn’t threaten back;

he yields to the Righteous Judge.

24Christ who “bears our sins himself,” Is 53.4

in his body, on the wooden cross,

so people, dying to our sins,

might live for righteousness.

“You’re² cured by his wounds.” Is 53.5

25You’re² “like straying sheep,” Is 53.6

but now you² return to the shepherd,

and the supervisor of your² souls.

We have to remember there’s a cultural context Simon Peter is dealing with. He didn’t write to the 21st-century United States; and if you’re not from the States he didn’t write to you either. His letter was for first-century eastern Romans. These people practiced a form of patriarchy—the paterfamilias, the head of the family, functioned like the king of the family, and largely had the power of life and death over everyone in it.

Obviously this includes slaves, but you might not be aware it also includes kids: Roman fathers could kill their children. Yes, this includes their adult children. Not for just any reason; he had to justify it to Roman society, but there were many reasons Romans would consider totally valid, such as defying or shaming one’s parents. Yep: Embarrass your dad, and he might have you whacked.

If you’ve ever seen movies and TV about Italian organized crime, like The Godfather or The Sopranos, there are a lot of similarities; these mobsters like to imagine themselves as modern-day Romans, and deliberately mimic Roman patriarchy. So, much like you can’t easily extract yourself from a mob entanglement, it was extremely hard to get out from under a Roman patriarch.

Jesus doesn’t teach like scribes.

Mark 1.21-22, Matthew 7.28-29. Luke 4.31-32.

As Jesus wrapped up his Sermon on the Mount, Matthew includes a comment about the way he taught his lessons, and the way his listeners reacted to it:

Matthew 7.28-29 KWL

28It happens when Jesus finishes these lessons,

the masses are amazed at his teaching:

29Jesus’s teaching isn’t like their scribes,

but like one who has authority.

It’s much the same way Mark and Luke described it when Jesus first began teaching in synagogue. Even walking-around rabbis like Jesus would teach in synagogue: They’d teach their kids on weekdays, and the general population on Sabbath—meaning Friday night after sundown. (Jewish days go from sundown to sundown, not midnight to midnight.)

Pharisee custom was for the synagogue president to let anyone anyone he recognized as a valid teacher, have the floor. Visiting rabbis and scribes, new guys, or young teachers spoke first. This wasn’t necessarily to honor them. If any of ’em turned out to be wrong, as sometimes they did, the last teacher—usually the synagogue’s senior scribe—would correct them, and get the last word. Synagogues were schools, Pharisees liked to debate, and sometimes they’d spend all night debating. Good thing it was Sabbath; in the morning everyone could sleep in.

Anyway, debates kept synagogue really interesting. But if the synagogue president (and later the Christian ἐπίσκοπος/epískopos, “supervisor”) couldn’t keep order, or when people lack the Spirit’s fruit, it could also become chaos. As you know, some people just don’t know how to be civil. They deliberately pick fights, or make personal attacks. Some will nitpick stupid things, defend loopholes, and spread misinformation. The evening could become an unprofitable waste. Happened among the early Christians too. Tt 3.9-11 Which is discouraging.

Into the belly of this beast, Jesus went to teach about God’s kingdom. Mark says this happened after he collected his first students from their boats; Luke puts this story before he collected ’em. Either way.

Mark 1.21-22 KWL

21Jesus and his students enter Capharnaum.

Next, on entering synagogue on Sabbath,

Jesus is teaching—

22and people are amazed at his teaching.

For in his teaching, Jesus acts like one who has authority,

and not like scribes.

Luke 4.31-32 KWL

31Jesus comes down to Capharnaum,

a city in the Galilee.

He’s teaching the citizens on Sabbath.

32 and they’re amazed at Jesus’s teaching—

because his word is given with authority.

The house on the rock.

Matthew 7.24-27, Luke 6.47-49.

Jesus concludes his Sermon on the Mount with his well-known analogy of building a house on bedrock, as opposed to building it on sand. Living by his teachings is building on bedrock. Ignoring his teachings is building on sand.

I live in California, where we see examples of this analogy played out on a yearly basis: Bad weather comes, and houses which were not built on anything solid either slide down hills, slide off cliffs, or slide into the ocean. Modern-day construction doesn’t bother to dig for bedrock; we build our own “bedrock,” namely steel-reinforced concrete foundations. Which is fine on a level plain which isn’t in danger of flooding, but people build houses everywhere, and don’t always plan for the worst.

Before Jesus became a rabbi he was a builder. Mk 6.3 Or “carpenter,” if you wanna go with the traditional interpretation of τέκτων/tékton—which doesn’t account for the fact a tékton is a person who builds stuff. Could be out of wood, but téktoni could also work in stone or metal, and could build both small things and large—including houses. So when Jesus discusses house-building, he knew what he was talking about. Heck, as Creator, Jn 1.3 when he discusses creating anything, he knows what he’s talking about.

Matthew 7.24-27 KWL

24“So whoever hears these teachings of mine

and does them

will become like a wise man

who builds himself a house on bedrock.

25The rain comes down,

the current comes in,

the winds blow,

and slam into that house—

and it doesn’t fall down,

for it was grounded on bedrock.

26And whoever hears these teachings of mine

and doesn’t do them

will become like a stupid man

who builds himself a house on sand.

27The rain comes down,

the current comes in,

the winds blow,

and slam into that house—

and it falls,

and it’s a huge disaster.”

Luke 6.47-49 KWL

47“Everyone coming to me,

hearing my teachings, doing them—

I’ll show you² what it’s like.

48It’s like a person building a house,

who digs, digs deep,

and makes a foundation on bedrock.

The flood-tide coming, the river bursts upon that house,

and isn’t strong enough to shake it,

because it’s well-built.

49Hearers who don’t do as I teach:

It’s like a person building a house

directly on the ground, without a foundation.

The river bursts on it,

and next it collapses.

The destruction of that house becomes great.”

When Jesus says, “I don’t know you.”

Matthew 7.21-23, Luke 6.46, 13.23-27.

Christians, particularly Evangelicals, quote this next teaching of Jesus a lot. But we tend to do this because we wanna nullify it. It’s scary.

See, it implies there are people who wanna get into God’s kingdom, who honestly think they’re headed there… but when they stand before Jesus at the End, they get the rug pulled out from under them. Turns out they have no relationship with Jesus. Never did. He never knew them. Psyche!

It sounds like the dirtiest trick ever. How can a Christian go their whole life thinking they’re saved, only to find out no they’re not, and they’re not getting into the kingdom? And by process of elimination, they’re therefore going into the fire? Holy crap; shouldn’t this keep us awake nights?

So like I said, Christians figure the solution to this quandary is to nullify it. “Chill out, people: This story isn’t about you. ’Cause you’re good! You said the sinner’s prayer and believe all the right things. This story applies to the people who won’t say the sinner’s prayer, don’t believe all the right things, and don’t realize they’re heretics or in a cult. You’re good. Relax.”

Or you can instead take the Dispensationalist route: “Remember, people, God saves us by grace, not works. And notice what Jesus says in this story about “Law-breakers” Mt 7.23 and “unrighteous workers.” Lk 13.27 He’s clearly talking to the people of the last dispensation, back when God didn’t yet save anybody by grace, and they still had to earn salvation by following the Law. It was true in Jesus’s day, but isn’t anymore. So we can safely ignore these scriptures. They don’t count for our day. They’re null.”

Obviously I’m not going with either of these explanations. I’m no dispensationalist (and neither is Jesus); humans never did earn salvation by racking up good works. Nor by racking up correct beliefs. Humans are saved by grace, and always have been.

So why doesn’t grace appear to apply to these poor schmucks, who tried the narrow door only to find it bolted shut?

Luke 13.23-27 KWL

23Someone told Jesus, “Master, the saved are few.”

Jesus told them¹,

24“Strive to enter through the narrow door.

I tell you² many will seek to enter,

and not be able to.

25At some point the owner could be raised up,

and could close the door.

You² standing outside might begin to knock at the door,

saying, ‘Master, unbolt it for us!’

And in reply he tells you², ‘I don’t know you².

Where are you² from?’

26Then you’ll² begin to say, ‘We ate with you¹!

And drank! And you¹ taught us in the streets!’

27And the speaker will tell you², ‘I don’t know where you’re² from!

Get away from me, unrighteous workers.’ ”

What’d’you mean the Master won’t recognize us? Isn’t he omniscient? Didn’t he at least remember all the times we hung out together? We had a meal with him! (Or at least holy communion—hundreds, if not thousands of times!) We studied what he taught! Why’s Jesus suffering from amnesia or dementia all of a sudden?

Like I said, scary idea. Lots of us like to imagine our salvation is a done deal, a fixed thing, something we can never lose unless we actively reject it. This story throws a bunch of uncertainty into the idea, and we hate uncertainty. We wanna know our relationship with Jesus is solid and real, and gonna continue into Kingdom Come.

Watch out for fake and fleshly prophets.

Matthew 7.15-20, 12.33-35, Luke 6.43-45.

Right after Jesus’s teaching about the narrow gate, Jesus gives a warning about people who pretend be prophets, but aren’t.

By prophet we Christians mean someone who’s simply heard from God, and shares whatever he’s said. If God tells me he loves someone, and I tell that someone God loves ’em, that’s prophecy. It’s not complicated. Any Christian who listens to God can do it. It’s why he gave us the Holy Spirit—so “your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy.” Ac 2.17-18 KJV Every Christian can prophesy, and oughta try.

But of course if there’s a real thing, and it’s valuable, there’s gonna be knock-offs and counterfeits. Hence there are such creatures as fake prophets. More than likely you’ve met some. They pretend to hear God—and they’ve learned some really good tricks to make it sound like they really did!—but they didn’t. For one of many reasons:

• Money, obviously. Churches might pay them to visit, and prophesy over people. Conferences might hire them as speakers. They could sell books and videos. Fans will send ’em money on a regular basis… instead of financially supporting their churches like they should.
• Control over others. They want people to listen to them and obey, because they supposedly speak for God. They want your pastor and church to obey them. They want the government to obey them. When they say jump, you don’t even ask “How high”—you just try to jump as high as you can.
• When sad people hear good news, it makes them so very happy. Well, prophets are in a great position to give sad people good news: Tell ’em what they want to hear! Tell ’em what they’re dying to hear. “You’re worried your atheist grandma went to hell when she died; well I’ve got some great news for you! She repented at the last second and I can see her in heaven right now, giving Jesus a big ol’ hug!” They’ll get so much love for saying such things. Feels great!
• People often presume prophets are extra-special Christians. God’s favorites. More gifted, more blessed, probably more devout. They wanna get revered like Roman Catholics revere their saints, so they try to make sure everybody’s aware they’re a prophet—i.e. automatic sainthood.
• And thanks to that automatic sainthood, fewer people are gonna notice—or believe it—when you sin. It’s a great cover for hypocrites.

There are plenty others. Hence there have always been fake prophets. And in his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gives us a really handy way to quickly identify a fake prophet: Their character. Their behavior. If they’re legit, they’re gonna be following the Holy Spirit and producing his fruit. If they’re not, they won’t.

Matthew 7.15-20 KWL

15“Watch out for the fake prophets,

who come to you² dressed as sheep,

but underneath they’re greedy wolves.

16 You’ll² recognize them by their fruits.

People don’t pluck grapes from thornbushes,

nor figs from thistles, do they?

17So every good tree grows good fruits,

and a rotten tree grows bad fruits.

18A good tree doesn’t grow bad fruits,

nor a rotten tree grow good fruits.

19Every tree not growing good fruit

is cut down and thrown into fire.

20It’s precisely by their fruits

that you’ll² recognize them.”

When we follow the Spirit, usually his personality makes a serious impact on our personalities. We begin to act like him. More love, joy, peace, patience, and all the godly traits Paul listed in Galatians, Ga 5.22-23 plus other traits God has which we see mentioned in the New Testament. Like grace.

If you’re a fake prophet, y’might be able to fake the prophecies convincingly. Maybe even the fruit… temporarily. People who observe you up-close, long-term, will know whether you’re legitimately producing fruit or not. Which is why a lot of the fakes who aren’t, try to make sure people don’t observe ’em up-close, long-term. It’s why they prefer independent prophetic ministries, separate from any churches which might be able to catch ’em when they’re not performing. Why they travel, stay in town just for a weekend, and their riders insist on separate hotel accommodations—instead of staying with anyone from the church, and spending significant time with them. It’s why the stuff they preach sounds so iffy when you actually know your bible… and why the fruit they profess also sounds kinda fake.