Saturday, August 4, 2012

New Covenant Lenses

     I am leaving the weapons series today but will return to it next week).
     There's a scene in the Visual Bible Matthew video that often captivates people the first time they see it. The scene is set in the Upper Room (Matthew 26:17-25) when Jesus (played by Bruce Marchiano) predicts Judas' betrayal, telling Judas, "Yes, it is you." Bruce chose to show Jesus saying this with tears in His eyes, with an obviously broken heart, with love for Judas clearly His primary emotion. The first time I saw this depiction of this event in the Visual Bible, my heart leapt with joy. I realized that this is indeed how Jesus would have responded, not in the almost angry, accusatory fashion that most people think of when they read about Judas' betrayal. Jesus didn't love Judas any less than any of the other disciples and was surely heartbroken at what He knew to be Judas' path to destruction.
     This story gives me the subject for today's musings. I want to write for a moment about how important it is to read the Bible (all of it) through New Testament lenses, the lenses of love, rather than the lenses of religion, our own brokenness and/or the Old Covenant. 
     What am I talking about? I am talking about "assuming" love and kindness and integrity as motivations when we read about events and read letters in the Bible. Perhaps a few examples will help with this. 
     First, let's look at Philemon (verses 8-9 and 19 in particular). Years ago when I taught this book to college students I noticed that they inevitably interpreted these verses as attempts to manipulate Philemon into doing what Paul wanted (welcome Onesimus back as a brother in the Lord, etc.). There are many reasons why this is a wrong thought, and I won't list them all, but here's a few thoughts. First, Paul knew that you can't manipulate or coerce people into reconciliation. To suggest that he would "pressure" Philemon is to make Paul profoundly ignorant of this basic truth about relationships. Second, in verses 8-9 Paul mentions that he could order Philemon to welcome Onesimus not to give a hidden threat to Philemon but instead to deliberately choose not to coerce Philemon. If you got a letter from an apostle asking you to do something, wouldn't you be inclined to obey regardless? So Paul had to mention his authority to Philemon in order to lay it aside. And as for verse 19 ("not to mention that you owe me your very self") Paul is talking in the context of his willingness to pay Philemon back for any damages his formerly runaway slave may have cost him, not trying to subtly force Philemon to do something against his will. I trust that helps clarify this little letter, but the real problem my students had was that they were reading this passage through the lenses of our American culture--where people manipulate people all the time. Furthermore, unfortunately even in the church few people understand the level of integrity in which Paul and the other apostles lived, so we tend to think they resorted to this kind of dishonest communication. Sigh...
     Another example of reading through the wrong lenses happens when some folks read the story of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5. For years I assumed that Peter was filled with anger and righteous indignation when he confronted Ananias, but I realize now that it's far more likely that Peter was tender and trying to appeal to both of these people. He knew the danger in which they were walking better than anyone else and was surely filled with grief as he exposed the truth to Ananias and gave Sapphira an opportunity to choose a different path (he asked her about the sale of the property not to entrap her but to give her opportunity to choose rightly, but most of us can't see that, at least not at first).
    Another example, again corrected by the Visual Bible, is in Matthew 23 where Jesus pronounces "woes" to the Pharisees. Most people picture Him saying these words in anger, but knowing His heart of love, isn't it far more likely that He spokes these words with sadness, rather than anger (as when He wept over Jerusalem)? Reading this passage (and many others) through a New Covenant Lens of Love changes how we see it, doesn't it?   
     One more example. I frequently hear people describe someone who is black and white (and usually somewhat judgmental) as "prophetic," especially if the person does indeed move in some of the revelatory gifts. But a person who is "prophetic" in the sense of a New Testament prophet would instead be known as one who was particularly good at comforting, encouraging and building up (see 1 Corinthians 14:3). A "prophetic" person who is judgmental and/or otherwise unkind is simply immature, not prophetic! But the reason some tend to use that designation is due to a misreading of the OT prophets, seeing their strong words of correction only as expressions of anger rather than appeals to turn back to God. And OT and NT prophets are very different for many reasons of course, but I will save that for another time (one big hint: Old Covenant prophets sought to enforce a covenant while prophesying to people with hardened hearts who couldn't hear God for themselves, whereas New Covenant prophets illuminate a covenant while prophesying to people with new hearts who can hear God themselves.) 
     What's the point of all this? Why does it matter what lens we use in reading Scripture. I trust that the answer to that is obvious, but just in case, consider this: How we view the things we read in Scripture affects how we view God and that affects how we view our relationship with Him and that affects how we treat ourselves and others. For that reason and many others, I highly recommend that you acquire and use New Covenant Lenses!

Learning to see through lenses of love,

Tom, one of Abba's little children

No comments: