by Aaron Davis
We know according to Romans 8:38–39 that nothing can separate us from God’s love, but I wonder how much of our decisions to submit our will between kingdoms keep us from experiencing the best that God has for us here in the earth. Have our kingdom compromises set the bar of our expectation far beneath the provision and power that are actually available? And if our expectations are subpar, what might the response be in the application and release of our faith, particularly if faith plays a role in the operation and institution of laws within the kingdom of God as scripture seems to imply with statements like, “If you will believe and not doubt,” “If you will have the faith of a mustard seed,” or even “A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways”?
When Jesus said, “It is finished,” I wonder if He envisioned a lot more being experienced in that finished work than we have come to understand. What if He saw the destruction of the kingdom of sin’s power over man as being much more liberating than what we have come to experience?
THE SCIENCE OF RESTORATION
Much like the interaction between atoms creating specific matter and energy in our physical universe, I wonder if the atoms that physically create us, when combined with the kingdom of God that they were created to function within, are a catalyst for unexplored power in this earth. I wonder if it’s possible that apart they simply exist as separate elements, but combined, through the release of faith, their power becomes infinitely exponential.
And if this is possible, how do we begin to explore and decipher the depths of what that could mean as it pertains to the expansion of the kingdom of God on the earth? Could we dismantle the manifestations currently observable because of man’s submission to the kingdom of sin? If more is possibly attainable than what we are experiencing and if lives hang in the balance, then where does that leave us in the overall responsibility of pursuing the answers of this quantum aspect of Christianity that may be accessible?
It would seem, both from what I have read and what I have inconsistently experienced and seen with my own eyes, that there is more . . . and I have to believe that the consistency (from a God who changes not) would increase when the understanding of what is missing or holding back the greater consistency is revealed.
Phil Mason tells us that “the development of the science of quantum physics has been like the discovery of a whole new world that is entirely at odds with our world. It has opened up to us an entirely new paradigm of reality that is in conflict with everything that we have understood to constitute reality in the macroscopic world.”70
I wonder if perhaps God has purposed for us a parallel kind of quantum experience for Christianity where what we thought we knew and what we come to discover that He has intended for us collides in a cataclysmic moment of divine enlightenment as we ask the pertinent questions, seek their answers, and pursue clarity for what it means to actually experience His kingdom—propelling us into a new reality of kingdom establishment on the earth.
CHAPTER ELEVEN
A Distant God
“I believe in God, who can respond to prayers, to whom we can give trust and without whom life on this earth would be without meaning (a tale told by an idiot). I believe that God has revealed Himself to us in many ways and through many men and women, and that for us here in the West the clearest revelation is through Jesus and those that have followed him.”
—Sir Nevill Mott, recipient of the 1977 Nobel Prize in Physics for his research on the magnetic and electrical properties of noncrystalline semiconductors
I attended a minister’s conference last summer where Pastor Brian Houston of Hillsong Church was one of the guest speakers. He opened his sermon with the statement, “How you view God determines how you respond to God,” and I raced quickly to get my notebook. This would be good!
Man’s opinions and views of God are nearly as vast as the numbers of people in existence. Some view God as a cosmic killjoy existing in the great and distant unknown whose primary desire is to deny mankind the experience of anything that resembles fun. Others view Him as the Man Upstairs whom they hope is watching over them when they need Him to be. Still others view Him as the strictest of bean counters, adding all of their sins and good deeds to the scales of their life. In the end, they just hope they did enough good things to tip the scales in their favor so that St. Peter doesn’t stop them at the gate of heaven and redirect them to that other place. It’s a perception-determines-reception type of scenario in which what we believe and the depth in which we believe it most certainly influences how we respond.
As Pastor Houston proceeded to elaborate, he cited the parable of Jesus from Matthew 25, often referred to as the “Story of the Talents.” In this parable, a master is going on a journey but gives three of his servants different denominations of money. To the first he gives five talents (about $5,000), to the second he gives two talents, and to the last he gives one talent.
When the master returned, the first two had invested their master’s money and both returned to him double what he had given them.
Matthew 25:21 (AMP)
His master said to him, Well done, you upright (honorable, admirable) and faithful servant! You have been faithful and trustworthy over a little; I will put you in charge of much. Enter into and share the joy (the delight, the blessedness) which your master enjoys.
The third servant took the money and buried it in a hole so that he could at least return to his master what was given to him to steward.
Matthew 25:24–25 (AMP)
He who had received one talent also came forward, saying, Master, I knew you to be a harsh and hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you had not winnowed [the grain].
So I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is your own.
The first two were motivated by making a profit and doing what they knew would please the master. The third was motivated by fear of loss and a concern for what might displease the master. Their responses with what was given them were markedly different and so was the master’s response to them. There is a huge lesson here for those who have eyes to see it: What motivates you (or your perception of it) has the potential to open doors and please God or close doors and cause you to miss the opportunity.
In his book, Legacy Now: Why Everything about You Matters, pastor Phil Munsey also addresses this same passage of scripture and says,
Your actions confirm or deny what you believe. They determine how your beliefs make a difference in your life or how they don’t really affect it at all. Many people say they believe something but lack the faith to live a life that expresses that belief… Will you live a life that never breaks out of the confines of comfortable living? Will you let fear hold you back from even trying? Jesus told the parable of the talents. The disappointment was not over the servant trying and failing but for failing to even try! The parable of the talents implies we will not be held accountable for what we failed at but at what we failed to attempt.71
What is it that motivates you as it pertains to how you relate to God? And what does that reveal about how you view Him? Referring the “Story of the Talents,” I wonder if it’s possible that viewing God from the wrong perspective can influence important outcomes in our lives and what we do with what God has made available to us. If what Jesus alluded to in Matthew 25:21 and Mark 11:23 is true, and some aspect of faith or belief is necessary to access the mysterious power to which Jesus referred, wouldn’t it make sense that if we had the wrong perception or belief, it could hinder our extension of that faith and the overall outcome?
Mark 11:23 (AMP)
Truly I tell you, whoever says to this mountain, Be lifted up and thrown into the sea! and does not doubt at all in his heart but believes that what he says will take place, it will be done for him.
JESUS AND DANNY TREJO
Recently, after an exhausting day, I turned on the TV to the movie Beat Down. I’d never seen it, but I was curiously drawn to the young Latino actor whom I’d never seen befor
e, talking to Danny Trejo. I thought to myself, He looks like a young Vin Diesel. But what kept me watching was the conversation between the two characters over the death of a friend. It struck a nerve in the core of my soul, portraying the very sentiment that I have been contemplating about God and the differences in how people view Him based upon what they have been taught, and how they process their experiences. In this scene, both men experienced the same loss but processed it completely differently.
Trejo says to the young man, handing him a piece of paper, “It’s Frankie’s death certificate. It’s almost as if God ordained—”
Trejo’s character is immediately interrupted by the younger man: “Bullsh-t! What does God have to do with anything?! If He was in charge, why’d he let Frankie get killed that way? He put you in that wheelchair, and Mom . . . Why’d He let her get cancer? Huh? Tell me! Answer me! You can’t, can you. Can you? All you can do is give me little bullsh-t religious sayings so you don’t have to feel anything, so you don’t have to really talk to me.”
The overwhelming question just beneath the surface of what the young man was conveying in this emotional exchange is very much the same as in so many conversations that I have had over the years, as people have contemplated Where was God or Where is God?
Our experiences, coupled with what we have been taught, have overwhelmingly placed God in our minds as the God who is up in heaven, which more subtly conveys the perception of the God who is somewhere other than where I am. To further make the point, if our actions and words reveal the nature of our belief systems, for those who attend a church, consider many of our commonly expressed worship songs and practices referring to God as the God Above. We lift our hands and intentionally direct our eyes upward—where we picture God to be—while we ask Him to come into our service. Analyzing the action would reveal that our body language and verbal expression convey our perception, which is often that God is out there somewhere. But not right here.
I know in defense of this perception, many will immediately cite the prayer of Jesus in Matthew 6 in which He prayed, “our Father who art in heaven,” but I would like to elaborate upon this a little bit.
Matthew 6:9–13 (AMP)
Pray, therefore, like this: Our Father Who is in heaven, hallowed (kept holy) be Your name.
Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven (left, remitted, and let go of the debts, and have given up resentment against) our debtors.
And lead (bring) us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.
This passage is often referred to as the Lord’s Prayer and is frequently reiterated as a part of the weekly prayer disciplines of Christians around the world. But what does it mean?
I don’t negate the significance of this prayer. As a matter of fact, I find myself referring to it frequently in my own prayer life. However, I do question if the commonly accepted view of the word heaven in this text is the intended view of the word used in the prayer of Jesus, and not the unintended interpretation we’ve changed it into.
HEAVENLY THOUGHTS
What do you think of when you hear the word heaven? Streets of gold? Pearly Gates? Angels sitting on clouds while lightly strumming their harps? Loved ones who have gone on before us? Seeing biblical characters? Meeting Jesus?
Okay, now let me ask you the next question: Where is this heaven? I’m not asking you to tell me where it is; I’m asking you, where do you picture it existing? Is it in the clouds? Is it out in the universe somewhere? Is it at the end of the universe?
For me, I subscribed to the mental image of heaven being around some distant star at least several thousand light years away, and I rationalized that once we died we wouldn’t be bound by the confines of physical travel and that as spirits we would just kind of go there at Star Trek-esque warp speeds, flying as quickly or slowly as we wanted, to this distant beyond where God lives and gold is as abundant as the limestone of earth.
No one ever taught me this; it was just how I pictured it. Maybe my perspectives were formed in early childhood Sunday school class when the teacher would share her own perceptions of where heaven is when taking the little material felt cutout of Jesus and placing him above the clouds surrounding the felt-board earth and then explaining that Jesus was sitting at the right hand of the Father. I’m speculating of course, but most certainly these perspectives developed somewhere in my life experiences. And whether aware of it or not, I’m cognizant now of the fact that these perceptions did influence not only my view of where God is, but also His proximity to me in my times of need.
DIFFERENT VIEWS
I recently studied a significant number of lessons from a man named Shane Willard, who is known for his teachings on the Hebrew perspective of Christianity after being instructed himself under his mentor, a pastor with rabbinical training. In one of his teachings, Shane describes the Hebrew perspective on the proximity of God and how it differs significantly from the common Western view. In this teaching, he explains that we typically see God as distant and removed from us, whereas Jews see God as being with them everywhere all the time.
He goes on to explain that the opening of the Lord’s Prayer, “Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be your name,” from the Hebrew perspective, would be understood and interpreted as, “My Supply that is as close as the air that I am breathing, I stop and become aware of you . . . ” This perspective on the Lord’s Prayer significantly shifted some things for me. I then studied additional resources on this particular subject on God’s proximity to us as it pertains to the Lord’s Prayer and how the Jews would have expressed and interpreted it.
The majority of the men who wrote the New Testament were Hebrew men whose native language was likely Aramaic (a Semitic language), but who also spoke and wrote fluent Koine (common Greek in the first century).72 These men, when choosing their words, may have likely chosen the Greek word that most closely resembled their Aramaic parallel.
In the Lord’s Prayer, the word heaven (which art in heaven) is the Greek word ouranos,73 which can mean “the visible heavens or the starry heavens,” but can also mean “the sky or the atmosphere (air).” And when considering the Hebrew perspective of God and His direct proximity to man, it would make sense to accept what Shane Willard taught as the Jewish interpretation of this prayer.
As I looked deeper into the typical American viewpoint of a distant God, I considered the European influence on our perspective as well. The most commonly revered translation of the Bible, the King James Version, was translated in England between 1604 and 1611. As with anything that is translated from one language to another, the choice of words in the translation can be directly influenced by commonly held belief systems.
So, if my remembrance of history is correct, during the Middle Ages the church sought to manipulate and monetize Christianity by encouraging ignorance and telling people not read the Bible, at times even restricting them from doing so. The priests and church leaders would read and interpret the Bible for them and then explain to them what it said.
As a result, God became more and more distant and the priests became more and more powerful and valuable. Then came the abuse of the power when church leaders would issue indulgences, for which parishioners would pay the priest and the priest would issue a pardon of sorts that covered their sin or even the sin of a dead loved one who may be caught in a purgatory/limbo between earth and heaven.
The cost of these actions was a worldwide perception of a distant God, so distant that He is often viewed as untouchable by the affairs of man. It was birthed intentionally during these times as a method of control but still lives on in the church today simply as a perceptional byproduct of hundreds of years of spiritual enslavement to religious manipulation and oppressive indoctrination.
SLAVES TO OUR PAST
Imagine the children
of Israel after being enslaved in Egypt for hundreds of years. When they finally came out of slavery, they still thought and oftentimes operated as slaves. It was one thing to take the slave out of Egypt; but it was something totally different to take Egypt out of the slave, and on several occasions we see this exemplified.
When God didn’t respond in the way or timing that they expected Him to, the Israelites immediately went back to what they were taught in Egypt, one time even building an idol to worship, having an orgy, and regressing back into the oppressive mindsets of their fathers and slave drivers.
In this example, this is why a significant aspect of the law of Moses was a process of unlearning what they learned in Egypt. God had to explain to them in detail that what they were taught pleased the gods of Egypt did not please the one true God, and He had to clarify for them that it was not necessary to do things in the fashion that they previously had to do, such as shaving their heads and carving their flesh to get the attention of God, as in Leviticus 19:27–28 (below).
Leviticus 19:27–28 (NABRE)
Do not clip your hair at the temples, nor spoil the edges of your beard. Do not lacerate your bodies for the dead, and do not tattoo yourselves.* I am the Lord.
In like fashion, I wonder if possibly the residual effects of the indoctrination of generations, hundreds of years of religious enslavement of people through the Dark and Middle Ages, have tainted our perception of who God really is as we continue to view Him in the distant light He was painted in many hundreds of years ago.
Please understand that I am not disrespecting an entire translation of the Bible or really even any aspect of it. I’m questioning the imperfection of language and possibility of mindsets and indoctrination during a specific period that influenced the words that were chosen while translating it from the original text, particularly when there was an option to choose several English words that may have changed how people interpreted what was being said, as in the case of the word Oranos.