Tom with kids in Kuwait

Tom with kids in Kuwait
Tom with kids in Kuwait

Thursday, September 15, 2011

The untold story of Matthew 20 is ours to tell

Read or listen to  Matthew 20:1-16

What a parable!

I really like the part where the workers who only worked a few hours or only a single hour rush to give thanks to the landowner.  Oops!  That’s not in the parable.  Perhaps that is the part that we should live after realizing how much this parable tells us about God’s Kingdom.

What a parable!

It has been reviewed in almost every conceivable way.  One allegorical interpretation is that the workers hired first are the patriarchs, then come the prophets, then comes John the Baptist, and finally we get to grace.

Those hired first could represent those under the law.  There was an agreement for what they received.  This was a sort of this for that arrangement.  Those hired later were under grace.

Some generalize the allegory and purport that Jesus was illustrating an egalitarian society.  All were considered equal in this dynamic regardless of how much or how little each worked.

Some get very general and just call this the great reversal.  But to just say that those who have the least will be rewarded because they have little asks us to ignore other teachings.  The parable of the talents  comes quickly to mind.  The servants trusted with much  who returned much to their master were rewarded with much.

We need to remember that this is a parable.  It is meant to explain unexplainable things by laying alongside an analogy of explainable things.  In this case, Jesus is explaining his Father’s kingdom.  For this parallel to be effective in our minds, we may need to just let them operate at the conceptual or less specific level.

Allegories want one specific thing to represent another specific thing.  Sometimes they do. 

At other times, we need to be less precise.  Sometimes we just need to listen to the entire story and let the parable speak to us.

What is the story that Jesus told.

There was a land owner.  He was an active landowner.  He went out early in the morning to hire workers.  He went, not his foreman.

He found workers.  They agreed on the daily wage and he sent them to work.  The wage was probably the standard for a day’s work. 

Three hours later, the land owner is out again and finds more men needing work.  He doesn’t chew them out for not getting out and about earlier.  He just hires them and tells them that he will pay them what is right.  These men go to work.

The landowner makes the rounds three more times.   The last one is just an hour before quitting time.  He asks these men why they are just standing around.  They reply that no one will hire them.  He hires them and they go to work.  There is no discussion of pay.

Then comes quitting time.

The landowner turns the job of paying the men over to the foreman.  He tells him only to pay the wages beginning with the last hired and working his way to those hired first.  Notice that there is no mention to the foreman of the wage to be paid.

Perhaps the foreman couldn’t make change, so everyone got a denarius.

Perhaps he knew his master so well, that he knew exactly what he wanted done.

Perhaps the landowner told him but Jesus didn’t deem that detail necessary to the story.

In any case, everyone gets the same pay.

We don’t have a chapter in this story where those who only worked a few hours, or even a single hour, are jumping for joy or running over to give thanks to the landowner.  We don’t get that part of the picture.

What we do get is a picture of grumbling, angry workers who received exactly what they agreed to work for.  They are upset because the landowner valued them the same as those who worked little.  In their minds, he made them equal to them.  They had earned their denarius.  Those others surely did not!

It would be very hard for any of us not to empathize with these workers.  They busted their butts for 12 hours and get the same as the guy who works for the last hour when the sun is lower in the sky and the heat of the day has passed.  We are not talking top level  executive salaries  here.  These are day workers.  They expected to be paid for what they did.  It was God’s law that they be paid at the end of the workday.  These are poor folks.

And they were paid.

They were paid exactly what they agreed to work for.  When they saw what others received, they became jealous, angry, and even coveted the more for less benefit of the other workers.

They were not cheated.  They received exactly what they had agreed to work for.

This parable is double bookmarked, perhaps double bookended is more accurate.

First, it begins (in the 19th chapter) with, many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.

It ends with, so the last will be first and the first will be last.

But outside of these two bookmarks are two others.

The story that precedes this one is the story of the Rich Young Man or the Rich Young Ruler.  The man left this encounter with Jesus sad because he had many possessions and Jesus had told him that to be complete in God’s love, he needed to give up these possessions. 

At the other end following a brief explanation to the disciples that Jesus would be mocked, flogged, and crucified; we find a mother seeking something special for her two sons.  Elsewhere, James and John themselves asked for the privilege of sitting on the right and left of Jesus in his kingdom. 

This first and last framing supports the windows of selfishness.  They support the window of me first, self first, it’s all about me.  And these bookend examples are about people who seem to be following God’s ways.

We want our god to be a god that goes along with the way we see the world.

He has told us that his ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts.  Instead of accepting that and trusting God, we would rather make a god that is fair by our standards.

This happens more than we might think.

How many of you have said or heard something along these lines.  I can’t believe in a God who:

·       Would send men to war.  I can’t read the Old Testament

·       Would permit genocide

·       Would allow something like Katrina to happen

·       Would allow suffering

·       Would allow child abuse in the world

·       Would permit evil people to prosper, even for a short time

·       Would send someone to hell

·       Wouldn’t send someone to hell

You can fill in the blank.  Whatever you put there should evoke a change in grammar.

What?

Specifically it involves a change in capitalization.  Take that big “G” in God and change it to the lower case “g” in god.  When we make our own god, it is no longer the one true God.  The one true God is the one who said, “Don’t do that.  Don’t make your own gods.”

For millennia men have made gods out of wood and stone, but in recent days we prefer to whittle our personal gods out of the one true God.

We do this all the time.  We put parameters on God.  We try to squeeze his mind, his thoughts, and his ways into our comfort zone.

They don’t fit.

We have been given the mind of Christ.  We can understand the mind of Christ.  We can know how to live as God’s love in this world.  We can understand the One who commissioned us to go forth into the world. 


We must trust God.

That doesn’t mean trust God if he meets certain criteria.  That we only trust him if he complies with our standard of fairness. 

Trust God!

He is holy.

He is righteous.

He is merciful.

He provides.

He is just.

He is almighty.



We have an Apostle’s Creed that further states what we believe.



I believe in God, the Father Almighty,

    the Maker of heaven and earth,

    and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:





Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,

    born of the virgin Mary,

    suffered under Pontius Pilate,

    was crucified, dead, and buried;



He descended into hell or some say to the dead.



The third day He arose again from the dead;



He ascended into heaven,

    and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;

    from which he shall come to judge the living and the dead.



I believe in the Holy Ghost;

    the holy catholic church;

    the communion of saints;

    the forgiveness of sins;

    the resurrection of the body;

    and the life everlasting.



Amen.

We need to note that we say we believe these things because of what God has revealed to us.  We do not believe in God because we first said these things and he fit the bill.  The Apostle’s Creed is an affirmation.

We trust the one true God.

The workers hired after the beginning of the work day trusted than the landowner would pay them what was right.  They did not negotiate a fair wage.  They trusted.

They trusted.

The landowner told them to go to work.  They obeyed.  They trusted.

The landowner was a generous man. 

He was capable of fairness and justice.  He paid those who worked the full day the full amount they had agreed upon.

He was capable of being a generous man.  He did what he wanted with his money.  He was not constrained by the worker’s version of fairness.  He wanted to be generous.

Those who were treated fairly wanted more.  They didn’t want fairness any more once they saw generosity.  But even then, they would not trust the landowner to be generous.  They wanted their own version of fairness.  They saw generosity and they wanted a revised version of fairness.  They wanted generosity that seemed fair to them.

Remember Animal Farm.  This short satirical story is loaded with more than you would expect from your typical barnyard exploration of egalitarianism.  The initiating premise was that:   All animals are equal.  As the story progressed this was modified slightly:   All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Evil had taken root in the workers hired first because they envied the landowner’s generosity.  They didn’t so much covet what the other workers received, because they had received exactly the same.  They despised the generosity of the landowner.

Our human nature leads us to covet what others have.  The nature of our Master is to be generous and merciful.  Our Master certainly may dispense justice and fairness, but his mercy and generosity are far greater.

Our part is to trust.

Unconditional trust.

Conditional trust is really not trust.

Our part is to trust.

The workers who trusted and obeyed the landowner were blessed with his generosity.

Remember that this is a parable.  It is a story used to describe the kingdom of heaven.  This is a kingdom that Jesus told us was within us and breaking out all around us, so instead of trying to figure out what this tells us about some far away place:

·       It is one that calls for each of us to assess ourselves.

·       Do we truly trust God or do we bargain with him?

·       Do we cherish our blessings or compare them with what others have?

·       Are we resentful of God’s generosity?

·       Has God blessed someone that you think didn’t deserve it?



We recently considered this from Paul’s perspective.  Who are we to judge another man’s servant?

We are to focus on our relationship with God through Christ.  We should be aware of what is going on around us—we are part of a family of faith—but we are not to be distracted by how others serve God or are blessed by God.  Our value is tied to our Creator and our Redeemer and not to what we have done or received in comparison to others.

The economy of the world revolves around competition, negotiation, and a considerable amount of selfishness.

The economy of God is generosity.

The economy of God is generosity.

The economy of God is generosity.



We as God’s people should be telling the untold story of this parable—the story of God’s generosity.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

God Loves You

It is a simple message but one that we all need to hear daily.
It is a simple message but one that our children really need to hear time and time again.
It is a simple message for a complicated world.
What’s the message?

God loves you.

So I wrote a simple book.
It’s designed to be read to your children until they can read it on their own.
It’s about God’s love.

Even if you don’t buy, borrow, or steal the book, tell your kids that you love them and that God loves them.
Tell them often.
Put a note in your son’s backpack.
Send your daughter a letter.
Write it on a cupcake.

God Loves You!
That’s forever.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Tuff Stuff kicks off on 12 September 2011

Tuff Stuff Bible Study

You are not invited to attend this Bible Study.


  What?

 You are challenged to fully participate in this Bible Study.


 It is not for everyone.  Everyone is not encouraged to attend.  This is only for those who want God to work in their lives through the reading, study, and discussion of his written word.  This is only for those who will commit to reading relevant scriptures for each topic area.  Compare this study to a fellowship meal.  You bring something wonderful and you enjoy many wonderful dishes.  But in this fellowship meal you are expected cook and eat.  You are expected to study, share, and listen.


Why such a hard line approach?

So we can study some of the more difficult passages, explore some tough concepts, and not be afraid to examine some of the more controversial topics of our generation.  Like what?  Topics such as:  Atonement, Discipline and Punishment, Divorce, Fear, Hell, Homosexuality, Sex, Soteriology, Stewardship, Taxonomy of Sin, War, and others.  Concepts such as:  Dealing with unholy behavior in fellow Christians, Role of Christians in Government, Wisdom and Judging, and others as selected by the group.  (Listed alphabetically not by order of study).


This is an open ended study group.  That is, we will not lead you to a predefined finding or try to convince you that you are wrong.  You will be challenged to seek the truth.  The truth itself is a wonderful liberator.


This study is not offered in lieu of worship.  This is Bible Study.  The group will meet only twice each month on the 2nd and 3rd Mondays from 6:00-8:00 pm.   It is for men and women from high school to too old to count the number of years.  Pray about this.  There will be commitment cards available in August.


The first meeting is 12 September 2011.

The format will involve reading and research on one topic for two weeks.  The areas addressed within each topic will be:

FTBTMS – For the Bible Tells Me So


Red Letter Words- What Jesus had to say on the subject


Word Studies- The width and depth of the original text
       
Commentaries/COF- What others have published on the matter


Unique Context- Were these passages written only for the original audience?


Personal Opinions- Here’s the fun part.  At the beginning of each new topic, all participants will be asked to write down what they think/believe in about a paragraph or less.  Each person will then seal this in an envelope not to be looked at until the study of the topic is complete.  These will be opened at the end of the study, shared if desired, or just used as a benchmark as to how much more each participant learned.

You will find the format unique and the discovery process to be genuine.  The study will be moderated by Tom Spence, but all who commit are expected to fully participate.

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

How many first century Christians are in hell?

How many first century Christians are in hell?
Modern day Christians most often look to John for the plan of salvation.  What about those first century believers that that heard the good news from those who repeated what we now have in Matthew, Mark, or Luke?
What about those who attended the church in Jerusalem?  With James as the head of this church, how much did he preach about Jesus?  James speaks to those who are servants and believers in Jesus Christ in his letter to the Diaspora.   Surely John didn’t get to all of those places first?
None of the synoptic gospels have the equivalent of what we find in John 3:16  or Romans 10:9-10.  We just don’t see the command to confess Jesus as Lord before a person can receive salvation.  What happened to those people who heard the good news as it was captured in Matthew, Mark, and Luke?  Were they condemned because they only had part of the story?
Did Matthew shortchange those who heard him speak because he spent too much time on beatitudes and teachings and not enough on being born again?
Mark is probably the recording of Peter’s gospel.  Peter—the rock—Dude, how could you miss this?
How could Luke repeat stories about Jesus that said a man could have eternal life if he loved the Lord with all his heart, soul, strength, and mind and love his neighbor as himself?  It’s right there at the beginning of the parable  of the Good Samaritan. 
Luke was likely a very educated man who ministered with Peter and with Paul.  How could he not have included such life saving language?
Some might say that when Jesus said love the Lord he meant love Jesus and that’s close enough to professing Jesus is Lord.  Was Jesus then master of the parable but inept and finding the right word for himself?  Surely not!  He used the Son of Man, Son of God, and the One sent by God very fluidly in the context of his teaching and discussions.
Were only those who heard the good news from John or Paul truly saved?
Or have we taken the good news of Jesus Christ and doctrinalized it to the point where only one formula works?
Have we become modern day Pharisees?
Will one who truly loves God not come to know Christ?  Would God invalidate the relationship on a technicality?  Would God call us to recannonize the Bible today and discard all but John’s gospel?
Were all of the disciples not commissioned to take the good news to the world?
We are blessed to have 66 books of the Holy Bible.  God set these apart for us as scripture.  He used a bunch of flawed men to canonize them, but he has a habit of doing that.  Abram was something of a liar, Moses a murderer, David an adulterer, and the list goes on.
Today we are blessed to have the Bible that we have, but it has not always been so ubiquitous.  Did God not find a way for flawed people to spread good news before we published all 66 in a collection?
Do we discount John’s gospel as too restrictive?
By no means!  It is the shortest distance between two points.  It is the most direct route to salvation.  It is the first book I tell new believers to read.  But I do tell them to read the rest of the gospels later on.  These other gospels cannot be relegated to just books on how to live or an account of the life of Jesus.  These words brought good news and salvation to many as well.
Is the question academic to the current generation as we have been privileged to easy access to the complete Bible all of our lives?
Perhaps.
But to give John’s gospel such preeminence is to discount the search for salvation and good news in the other gospels.
Does this in any way lessen the passion and urgency with which we take messages that we have learned from John’s gospel and Paul’s letters to the world in which we live?
Not at all!
But it does open our eyes to the truth.  Sometimes we have excluded much of God’s word from the truth because we as modern day Pharisees must fit all of God’s word into our comfort zone.
I remember a Marine Corps fashion statement from over 30 years ago when I was a second lieutenant at the Basic School in Quantico, Virginia.  Marines teach fashion?  Absolutely!  Nobody does camouflage like we do.
The advice I received from one of the captains assigned to teach us was to dress comfortably cool.  You always needed a reason to generate a little body heat.  Some comfort was good.  Too much put you to sleep.  You needed to be able to get up and move out without getting overheated.
We too should have comfort and assurance in our salvation.  God really does love us.  He really has preserved us.  He is surely not finished with that for which we have been predestined.
But we should not shrink back into our comfort zone.  God has much to teach us about his Love.
Paul had great anguish that Israel appeared to be lost.  They had rejected Christ.  But they had surely not been hung out to dry.
Let us read every gospel with the expectation of finding the good news that Jesus commissioned those first disciples to proclaim.
I don’t think that anyone who heard the good news from any of the commissioned was deprived of life saving information. 
OK, so how many first century Christians are in hell?
What an absurd provocation.  Why would anyone even ask this?
Because today we are quick to assign God’s judgment and threaten a person with hell when we are commission to spread good news.  We are commissioned to tell of life in Christ and salvation through faith in him.  We are commission to make disciples, baptize, and teach.
Somewhere along the way we decided that no one would respond to the grace of God unless we scared the hell out of them.
Is love not stronger than fear?
Can you really confess Jesus is Lord out of fear?
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and knowledge, but does the fear of hell make for a true confession?
Read the gospel that John wrote.  Preach salvation through Christ alone.  Then read the rest of the Bible not trying to make it fit into your comfort zone.
It will be a challenge.
More than that, it will be a blessing.

Sunday, May 15, 2011

The Good Shepherd Discourse

In this short exegesis, we look at what is often called the Good Shepherd discourse.  We will encounter some terminology that some will have heard before, but which is not considered as much in the New Testament as it was in the Old Testament, especially in the Psalms.  We are used to Jesus setting things in parallel for our understanding and have grown accustomed to metaphor and hyperbole in his teachings, but this section requires a little more literary insight to fully appreciate the message.
Let’s begin with antithetical parallelism.  There’s a term we don’t use much in daily conversation, but with which the Jewish people would have been very familiar.  It is to define, explain, or otherwise describe something by what it is and what it isn’t in parallel verses. There is nothing uniquely Jewish about defining something by what it is and what it is not.  The great Greek thinkers did this frequently, but often in extended discourse for what is and what is not.  The literature of the Hebrews is unique in adding the parallel construction to this genre.
Let’s examine this style further.  I might describe my drive to the office in two parallel sentences.
My drive to the office is a short one.
The daily trek is not so long.
The Psalms and Proverbs are full of this type of literature.
Consider the blameless,
observe the upright;
there is a future for the man of peace.
But all sinners will be destroyed;
the future of the wicked will be cut off.
Psalm 37:37-38
A cheerful heart is good medicine,
but a crushed spirit dries up the bones.
Proverbs 17:22
If you have ever tried to study the proverbs, you have probably read several verses and remarked to the group or to yourself, “it seems like it just said the same thing two or three times in a row.”  That’s because it did.  That was the literary style of God’s people through several centuries. 
The next literary tool we need to experience is called Chiastic construction.  That is to build to the middle.
The most notable chiastic construction in the Old Testament is probably the story of the great flood.  It begins in Genesis 6:10 and ends with Genesis 9:19.  The story begins with Noah, his ark building, being shut in, and the flood.  The poem continues from the flood, to the receding waters to Noah on dry land once again.  In the middle of this poetic account is a single statement:  God remembered Noah.  The crux of the story lies in the middle.
We see similar construction at the beginning of John’s gospel, this one much shorter and having two parallel thoughts in the middle.

In the beginning was the Word,
            and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
  He was with God in the beginning.
John 1:1-2

Let’s begin our journey through the Good Shepherd Discourse. [View Color contrasted scripture].

The discourse actually begins at the end of the 9th chapter of John.

 41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

Jesus has just slammed dunked the Pharisees.  The Pharisees have cast out one of their sheep because Jesus healed him and the man who was blind spoke the truth to them.  The Pharisees believed themselves to be the shepherds of the Jews. 
When Jesus deals with the Pharisees, we see two distinct styles.  In one, Jesus answers question with question, usually until the so called shepherds of the Jewish people give up or at least retreat to regroup.  The second is to launch into an extended discourse that puts the Pharisees back on their heels.  The time for questions is over and the Teacher teachers until he is finished.  The latter is the case in the Good Shepherd Discourse.
Jesus would first explain what a shepherd is and is not—that’s the antithetical parallelism--and leave the analysis and application to the Pharisees, his disciples, and probably to the crowd that had formed following the excitement of Jesus healing a man who had been blind from birth.
He begins by explaining who the shepherd is not.  He is not the one who comes in any way but by the door or the gate.  The shepherd does not climb over the fence.
Those who come in any way except the gate are thieves and robbers.  Why the two terms?  Thieves steal by stealth—often at night, and robbers steal in broad daylight usually with violence. 
But the one who comes in by the door is the shepherd.  The doorkeeper—often an undershepherd—would open the gate for the shepherd.
The next antithetical pairing begins with who the shepherd is.  He is the one who call his sheep by name and they hear and recognize his voice.    The shepherd goes before the sheep and the sheep follow the shepherd.
Next Jesus explains who the shepherd is not.  He is no stranger.  The sheep will not follow the person or voice of a stranger.  They will flee from the stranger.
You might think that with a crowd following Jesus and not much interested in hanging out with the Pharisees; the analogy would have been crystal clear.  It was not.
What to do?
Jesus moves the discourse into the first person but keeps the antithetical genre intact.  He says I am the door of the sheep.
In contrast to the next line—who ever came before me are thieves and robbers.
Then back to the door in the next line.  I am the door.  Anyone who enters through me will be saved and go in and out and find pasture.
Then back to the thief.  He comes to kill and to destroy.

Jesus continues in the first person.  I am the good shepherd.  The good shepherd gives his life for his sheep. 
This is in contrast to the hireling—the hired hand.  He is not the shepherd.  He will not die for the sheep.  In fact, he deserts them at the first sign of trouble.
The hireling is further described as one who does not care about the sheep.
Jesus concludes this antithetical set by again saying I am the good shepherd.  I know and am known by my sheep.

Jesus continues in parallel without the antithetical.  That is, he no longer needs to describe what he is or is not as he talks of his relationship to his Father. 
The Father knows me and I know the Father.
I lay down my life for the sheep.
But not just these sheep--there are other sheep.
They will hear my voice and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
The Father loves me because I lay down my life that I will take it up again.
Then briefly back to the antithetical.
No one takes my life.
I have the power to lay it down and take it up.
Then Jesus ends this pericope when he began it, with the Father.
This command, I have received from my Father.
What is the result of this discourse?
There was division among the Jews.  Surely some of these were Scribes and Pharisees.  The rest surely were vested in the doctrine and dogma of their religious leaders.
We have surely ended where we began, with the blindness of the Pharisees.
It’s good to have someone to point a finger at.  The Pharisees make an opportune target.  We can study this lesson and say what a bunch of knuckleheads and not have to apply the lessons of this discourse to our own lives. 
We can understand the literary construction and admire the gospel writer for recording this wonderful discourse so poetically.  Again, we can enjoy this passage without having to apply this to our lives.
It’s sort of like a get out of jail free card.  We get to look at a part of the Bible that just seems to apply to somebody else. 
Except, there was one sentence in this exegesis that I left out.  This discourse began with the blindness and confusion of the Pharisees and ends with the same.  In general terms and in the first person Jesus describes who the shepherd is and is not.  We get all of this literary excellence, but when we look to the middle of the discourse—yes this is where we bring in that Chiastic term and see how the story builds to the middle—we find a single sentence. 
It is a purposeful sentence.
It is not cloaked in literary tools.
It is there for all to see.
It speaks to us all.  There goes the get out of jail free card.

I have come that they may have life and have it more abundantly.

Is there a good versus evil theme in discourse?  Certainly.
Are there words of caution for God’s people?  Surely there are.
Should we be on the lookout for the Pharisees of our age in the doctrines and dogma that have somehow superseded the very word of God?  You betcha!
But we must also recognize that these are all secondary or even tertiary to the very direct and very purposeful statement of Jesus.  He came to give us life.  He came to give us a way to live that life to the fullest extent possible.
Are there forces and people and words that are working against us?  Yes.
But they cannot get into the fold.  They are not permitted in the sheep pen. 
Paul would later describe our relationship this way.
For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 8:38-39
So we can have abundant life!
So we can live life to the full!

But what is abundant life?  What do we know about abundant life?  Let’s look to the words of Jesus as to what we should expect.

Jesus came to save not to condemn.
Jesus said those who followed him would be persecuted.
Jesus said all who left family and possessions to follow him would receive many times in return in this life and the one to come.
Jesus after showing us what a neighbor was in the parable of the Good Samaritan and showing us how to serve each other by the washing of the disciples feet told us to do likewise.
Jesus told his disciples they would drink of his cup of suffering.
Jesus told his disciples that he longed to eat a special meal with them.
Jesus told his disciples that his yoke was easy and his burden was light.
Jesus told his disciples to watch, be alert, not to fall asleep.
Jesus told his disciples not to worry about tomorrow.  Tomorrow has enough troubles of its own.
Jesus promised that trial would come upon the world.
Jesus promised that a Helper, a Comforter, a Spirit of truth would come to us.
Jesus told a parable of a wise man who built his house on a rock foundation.
Jesus said he owned no real estate—he had no place to rest his head.
Jesus longed for his Father to take away the cup that was the hour of his trial.
Jesus desired to do his Father’s will and to be the very sacrifice for which he came.
Jesus told all who were weary and heavy laden to come.
Jesus commissioned his disciples to go into the world.

Sometimes we think that the abundant life is the luxurious life, but it’s not.  Sometimes we mistake the abundant life for the pain free life, but it’s not.  Sometimes we mistake the abundant life for the trouble free life, but it is not.
A life without any need, or without pain, or without challenges is not really life.  Think to the end of the New Testament and the words of Jesus to the Angels of the Churches of Asia.  He told of wonderful outcomes for him who overcomes.  How can you be an overcomer if there are no challenges?
Sometimes we think that the abundant life is the life that follows this one, and it is. 
We think one day life will be good, and it will be.   
These statements both are true but we treat them as restrictive parameters.  We see the abundant life beginning at some future point but Jesus calls us to live life to the full now.
He calls us to live in purposeful relationship with him now.
When we do that, the pain and suffering as well as the joy and celebration are all part of an abundant life.  The gifts and rewards from a righteous God and the sacrifices we make with what he gives us are part of living life to the full.
It doesn’t matter if we are coming are going—and in today’s busy world it is sometimes hard to tell the difference—we are to live life as fully as possible.
What makes life abundant are not the things we accumulate or the events we schedule but that we have these things and participate in the events of our life in purposeful relationship with Jesus.  Living to the full is in that we live with Jesus as Lord and Savior but also as brother and friend.  That the verbs to live and to love become nearly synonymous.
John’s gospel is very reflective, probably the most reflective of the four that are canonized.  Let’s get down to the nitty gritty of abundant life.  Let’s put it in something we Okies can understand—sporting events. 
The worst thing for me that I can think of in a sporting event is not an injury.  It is not striking out three times in one game—though that’s not much fun.  It is not missing a tackle or missing a shot at the buzzer.  It’s not losing by one run or losing by five touchdowns.
The worst thing that could happen to me at a sporting event would be to come home with a clean uniform.  A uniform should have a little sweat, dirt, or even blood on it at the end of a contest. The worst thing would be to not have had a chance to dive for a line drive or slide into home.  The worst thing would be not to have the chance to make the tackle or make the shot.  I guess if I were a hockey player, I would say the worst thing that could happen would be to come home with all of my teeth.
In the late 1990’s while living in Orlando, Florida, my son and I were headed to a Solar Bears hockey game at the Orena.  We left in plenty of time and avoided the parking lots disguising themselves as highways.  That is to say, we took the toll road.  But as we neared the event, traffic was very backed up.  It seemed that there was a tractor pull at the nearby Citrus Bowl and exits of the toll road serviced both locations.
We arrived in our seats with 1 minute and 21 seconds elapsed in the first period.  I asked the person next to me if we missed anything.
She said, “A goal and two fights.”
Now that’s abundant life!  Eighty-one seconds elapsed and we missed a goal and two fights.  Could you pack much more into this extended minute?
We are a count and measure society and we like to think in terms of what things will be waiting for us in heaven and we forget to live along the way. 
Jesus didn’t come to shackle us until time for trial.  The trial is over.  We were found guilty and sentenced to death, and Jesus stood in our place.
Do you think he did this so we could go back to business as usual?  He did this so we could live—beginning here and now—life as God intended it to be. 
Jesus said, I came so you could live life to its fullest.  I wish he would have added four simple words: get on with it!
We are God’s people and we need to get on with living.  Loving, serving, healing, teaching, listening, helping, guiding, giving, enjoying each other, being ridiculed for believing God loved us enough to send Jesus to the cross, hurting when we lose someone close, rejoicing when one comes to know Jesus, resting from the busyness of the world, thanking God for more things that we can count, asking him for what we need, reaching for things beyond our grasp and sometimes falling flat on our faces, and other times achieving more than we thought possible and not having to ask how that happened.
When we go to bed at night, we should do more than just say, “Man, am I tired.” 
We should say, “Lord, I used everything in my tank.  I’m empty.”  Then we can say, “That was a day lived to the full!”
Perhaps the abundant life is known in a paradoxical antithetical parallelism.

Lord, my tank is empty.
I have lived this day to the full.