Hi Rog
This one is really out of left field. It dropped into my mind during my morning reading of Luke's gospel and I immediately wrote it down to think about. However, I thought you might like to think about it with me. What do you think? I'm not sure what I think yet :-)
John the Baptist's Clue to the Future?
Luke 3 : 16 - 17
"Jesus will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire," said John.
What did he mean?
Although the crowd was unlikely to fully understand, we have the advantage of rear vision.
Jesus was Israel's promised Messiah. He had come to bring them the salvation God had promised.
Salvation has two components - judgement and forgiveness.
Judgement brings conviction of sin and repentance, immediately or sometime later.
When judgement achieves its objective, forgiveness is received and reconciliation with God enjoyed.
As John said, judgement was to be effected by a baptism with the Holy Spirit or with fire.
In Israel's case, only a relative few were convicted of their sin by the ministry of the Holy Spirit through Jesus and the apostles, and so few repented, received forgiveness and enjoyed reconcilaition with God.
A profound example of this Holy Spirit baptism process is described in Acts 2.
However, the majority received judgement by fire in AD70, at the end of the age, when the nation was destroyed.
So a baptism by the Holy Spirit was effected first, and, since that didn't bring conviction and repentance, a subsequent baptism by fire was used.
Notice also how John further illustrates this process using the wheat-chaff example.
The wheat will be gathered into the barn, but the chaff will be burnt up by fire.
Although this was John speaking directly to the nation of Israel in the first century AD, I wonder if this principle, which was employed at the end of the old covenant age, will also be used at the end of the new covenant age(s).
During the New Covenant age(s), the Holy Spirit will continue to bring judgement to humankind, both Jews and Gentiles, through the ministry of Christians and through direct spiritual revelation.
Those who are convicted of their sin and repent, will receive forgiveness and be reconciled to God.
This will again be a minority of humankind, by the looks of things.
The majority will leave this planet unreconciled to God and heading for a baptism of fire.
John the Apostle (not the Baptist) in the Revelation calls this the lake of fire.
This baptism of fire is to bring formerly unresponsive and rebellious people to repentance, so they too will receive forgiveness and reconciliation at the end of the ages.
The lake of fire is not torturous punishment for ever, as many assume, but is forever available to ensure all are brought to repentance so God can have mercy on all, as Paul informs us in Romans 11.
So eventually, one way or the other, by Holy Spirit or by fire, God will be all in all, having reconciled all to himself through Jesus Christ.
needs to be rewritten for web, and reposted
Hi Barry,
ReplyDeleteBeen thinking about this for a while and thought I should post something before Monday when we next talk.
It is a great topic, and certainly is "on topic" in mind. We would have to get to this eventually, so now is as good as any time.
The point that stands out to me that we may need to agree on first is that none of us can respond to God without his intervention. Hence, our respond to his call is not a function of our free will, but his action in opening our minds (Jn 6:44, and Phil 2:13 are some of many that I think I can dig up on this). I think we both see eye to eye on this, but we need to clarify this between us first anyway.
Refering to your statement:
"So a baptism by the Holy Spirit was effected first, and, since that didn't bring conviction and repentance, a subsequent baptism by fire was used."
I wonder if in this we are saying that the baptism by fire at the fall of Jerusalem led as a direct consequence to those who died by this means being made ready for salvation? I don't think we can say this so easily, but maybe you already have a strong case in scripture for this?
Maybe this is not what we are saying, but I sense we are at least alluding to that, even if unwittingly.
I think a question we have to look at is whether God really needs fire to bring anyone to repentance. I suspect not. I suspect that when God moves to convict someone, it is impossible to resist. God knows us better than we do, plus his move to bring us to him is really just moving us towards the natural state that we were originally made for - to be in harmony with him.
This is not to say that fire does not have a necessary purpose, but it probably does not relate to being convicted of sin and salvation.
Thinking out loud with you here, the Lord seems to have a great deal to say on refining of silver and gold to bring forth quality in his children. There is something about "fire" which the Lord takes a great interest in to achieve his ends in each of us.
Lk 3:16 makes an interesting comment on baptism by spirit and by fire, and I think I can attest to both in my life. The fire side probably has a great deal to do with putting stuff in me to death.
I will post this now in case I go over a limit and do another post.
Roger here again Barry, realising that I did not sign off with my name.
ReplyDeleteThe question that then sticks out in my mind is whether we can avoid the idea that God somehow fails to convict the majority before fire is necessary.
My current position is that God can convict whoever he wants, whenever he wants. It does though seem necessary for the majority of mankind to be left the way we are, with the natural consequences that come from that, so no one can ever think that we could ever work things out without God.
It is fair to view what is said in Luke 3 about fire that baptises and that burns up chaff as being one and the same thing. They may too be separate though.
It is also fair to see the lake of fire in Revelation as a benchmark between ages. I like this concept Barry. We need to really test this.
Much like Christians go through figurative fire in their normal lives, it is not out of the question that some kind of "fire in life" experience will be necessary for the rest of mankind. It would be true to say that many already have this already from their normal run of life without Christ.
Another idea that has popped into my head just now is that if Jesus did return at the fall of Jerusalem, and so began a "1000 year" period where the resurrected saints are ruling with Jesus, then maybe this rule of the saints with Jesus has a great deal to do with the running of this messed up world so both saved and unsaved experience necessary fire prior to the new heaven and earth. Quite a left field idea, but maybe sheds some light on the complexity of coming to terms with where we are now if Jesus did return in AD 70.
This would not be to say that there won't still be some form of necessary fire experience to come. but maybe much of that is being experienced now for both saved and unsaved?
Best not say too much here lest I raise too many details that require individual attention.
Maybe what will help this blogging towards meaningful outcomes is to make a general statement like you have above, and then break it down into the specific points, so each specific point is addressed before moving to the next. There is always a danger of more points being raised in each specific point, but it still leads us to squaring away relevant issues and questions so we can keep moving forward systematically. I hope I'm making sense.
I look forward to your thoughts here Barry.
Bless you, Rog