Passport Rock City

            This past week I had the privilege of accompanying First Baptist Church of Gainesville, Georgia to the twentieth annual Passport camp in Wingate, North Carolina.  I myself have never felt completely comfortable in the “camp” environment, and was hesitant to attend, however, after spending the past six days at Passport, I know I am better for the experience.  In particular, a certain attitude towards Christian service and ministry was presented in a manner that is both practical and obedient to Christian Scripture and Tradition, yet somewhat foreign to many of the Evangelical gatherings that I have attended in the past.  Finding myself both convicted and refreshed that such a mentality exists, I have come back to Atlanta with a new attitude towards my role within the Body of Christ and my obligation to meet the needs of the helpless.

            When the “Watering Malawi” video came across the screen for the first time I thought to myself, Great, another video with big bold words rotating across the screen with an occasional orphan or puppy for added emotional leverage.  To be fair, I was spot on.  Sure, I would have probably given a few bucks just like everyone else, but a chord of annoyance had been struck deep within my being that was quite familiar.  It seems that the modern approach to Christian mission is to hold gatherings that costs tens of thousands of dollars, in an effort to send thousands of dollars to a particular agency, which will then fly hundreds of dollars to a remote village that needs a miracle no money can seem to buy.  Here we go again.

            Fortunately, my skepticism was destroyed only a few hours later.  Around noon the next day, I made my way with about twenty youth from various churches to the Habitat for Humanity Recycling Center.  Now I myself am far from green, but in an effort to produce capital for Habitat, I obliged.  Meanwhile, other groups were working with the YWCA of Wingate to mentor and minister to children from low-income families and rummaging through abandoned homes to auction off their findings.  The final project also benefited Habitat.  That night, as the night before and the nights that would follow, Malawi was mentioned again, but this time my pessimism had disappeared.  There seems to be something special about sending help to those in the far corners of the world, while simultaneously serving those at home.  These men and women weren’t concerned with just hitting the home run; they were making base hits all day long.

            It is one thing to write a check.  It is quite another thing to give of your time and energy.  At Passport, we had the opportunity to do both.  I find it terribly impractical to focus on a tragedy thousands of miles away while neglected the devastation down the block.  At the same time, we live in a world that is lost and dying, both spiritually and physically.  There is no reason that we cannot help our neighbor, be they Malawians or Carolinians.  The important thing to remember is that we are not required to choose only one, or to neglect our neighbor next door for the well being of the family at the end of the cul-de-sac.   

            I myself am a skeptic and always have been.  Sadly, I tend to see the glass half empty, and criticize those who I find impractical.  Of course I am not proud of this, but it is a character flaw that I am not ignorant of.  Considering this disposition, it as all the more powerful to recognize the disappearance of my hesitations.  This week left me no choice but to gladly embrace the cause in Malawi.  No longer does the excuse of focusing on what is local allow me to reject that which is global.  We can do both, and the lives of those both near and far are dependent upon our action. 

Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for widows and orphans in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.  James 1:27

More Than a Skeptic: Defending the Reputation of Saint Thomas

Known commonly as Doubting Thomas, the apostle Thomas is remembered as the notorious skeptic who demands proof of the Resurrection in the gospel of John. Unfortunately, within Protestant communities the apostle Thomas is often thought of only as a prime example of how not to act.  With the exception Judas Iscariot, the reputation and contributions of this apostle and saint have been marred over the centuries above any of the other Twelve.  While Peter provides multiple examples of unfaithfulness, these examples are usually coupled with examples of his contributions recorded in the Acts of the Apostles and elsewhere.  It is not so with Thomas.  Still, it is not that evidence in support of Thomas does not exist, for certainly it does, but that for some reason or another Christians ignore them.  Therefore, in order to defend the reputation of this faithful servant of the Lord, it is imperative that the modern Church not only learns from the mistakes of Thomas, but also recognizes and imitates his contributions.

According to tradition, the apostle Thomas is the only apostle to travel outside of the Roman Empire to spread the Gospel of Christ.  It is possible that he traveled to Syria as well.  Consequently, Thomas likely covered a larger area in his missionary journeys than any other apostle, including Paul.  Today Christian populations in India praise Saint Thomas for bringing the Living Word to their country.  Ultimately, this missionary journey cost Thomas his life, as the pagan priests in the areas of Thomas’ preaching ran him through with a spear.

Despite the many contributions of Luther, Calvin, and other reformers, the split with the Catholic Church has lead to an unfortunate split with Church tradition within protestant denominations.  While some still hold to these earlier traditions, many refuse to accept any tradition passed down through the generations of Catholicism, unless that tradition is acknowledged in the New Testament.  Furthermore, the milder approach to recognition of saints by Protestants may diminish the importance of the saints’ contributions.  Simply put, the protestant effort to distance Protestantism from Catholicism may result in the rejection of the traditions of the saints.  Fortunately, the New Testament is not silent on the positive nature and contribution of Thomas.

   In the eleventh chapter of John’s gospel, the apostle Thomas exhibits one of the most courageous attitudes of the entire New Testament.  Having witnessed the attempted stoning of Jesus in Judea, the disciples are reluctant to return.  It is at this moment that Thomas offers his bravado to his fellow disciples with the assertion, “Let us also go, that we may die with him.”  Apparently this is all the encouragement the disciples need as they go with Jesus to Judea to witness the resurrection of Lazarus.  Regrettably, this willingness to face death with Jesus is rarely emphasized when the apostle Thomas is expounded upon.

Nonetheless, it is imperative that this story be told.  Church tradition offers a saint who went to the ends of the known world to spread the message of Christ, and was ultimately killed for doing so.  If tradition isn’t enough for some, the very gospel that presents Doubting Thomas also presents the Courageous Thomas who alone is willing to face death with his Lord.  So it is that both tradition and Scripture give witness to a noble and faithful servant who contributes more than an example of doubt and unfaithfulness to Christians today.

   

The Wrath of God

            In his book, The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins describes the God of the Jewish and Christian faith as,

…Arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction; jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.[1]

Using the wrath of God, enacted against a plethora of peoples, Dawkins argues that the actions of God, particularly the God of the Old Testament, illustrate the attributes of a fictitious, unjust villain.  Essentially, because of his anger and wrath, God is portrayed as a controlling, unloving bully.  Furthermore, Dawkins is not alone in his philosophy regarding the Judeo-Christian God.  Paul Copan unpacks what he calls “New atheism” in, Is God a Moral Monster?  Copan describes the philosophy of new atheists as inquisitive to,  “…Questions about strange and harsh Old Testament laws, a God of jealousy and anger, slavery, and the killing of the Canaanites.”[2]  Included in this brotherhood of educated skeptics are the likes of Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and the previously mentioned Richard Dawkins.  These men, brilliant if only in their particular fields (biology, evolutionary theory, etc.), are using difficult questions to argue against the existence of God.  Brilliant as they may be however, they are far from pioneers on the subject.  Marcion suggested the rejection of the Old Testament entirely, Volz came to the conclusion that God had a demonic, evil alter-ego[3], and notable twenty-first century pastor and author Rob Bell tip toed around the subject of wrath in his book, Love Wins, carefully brushing past any in-depth look at the wrath of God which might seem offensive.[4]  Certainly the wrath of God has always been ammunition for the skeptic and shame for those who attempt to defend the faith. 

In addition to the obvious advantage of silencing the skeptic and defending the faith, an appropriate understanding of God’s wrath gives the believer a more complete portrait of their Creator and a better grasp of His overall plan for humanity.  For these reasons, it is crucial that the Christian be educated about all of the attributes of God, including His wrath.  Difficult as the task may be, it is essential to a healthy Christian theology.  In a study on first and second Peter, author David Faust presents that,

[some] fears are irrational---unhealthy phobias and unwarranted anxieties that paralyze, agonize, and immobilize us.  Ironically, it’s not uncommon to find that Christians are afraid to talk about their faith with others---even though we possess the good news that Jesus came to set us free from fear and death.[5]

The unfortunate reality is that many Christians shy away from topics like the wrath of God out of fear.  However, in allowing that fear to overcome the believer, it is impossible to present the fullness of the Christian Gospel.

            Prior to forming any type of defense for this particular attribute, a solid definition must be developed.  Questions involving the forms in which God’s wrath becomes manifested (what it looks like), the catalyst for God’s wrath (what causes it), and the recipients of God’s wrath (who gets it), are vital to defining the attribute.  In order to do so, both the Old and New Testament Scriptures must be employed.  Additional commentary may also be beneficial as a sub-text, to provide a look at some human understanding and interpretation of God’s wrath; what it looks like, what causes it, and who gets to experience it.

            Certainly, square one for defining characteristics of God is to examine them as they have been recorded in Scripture.  For purposes of consistency, examination will be given to four particular passages concerning the wrath of God.  Each passage serves as a representative for one of four canonical sections.  These include the Torah, the Writings, the Prophets, and the New Testament.  Beginning with the Torah, a contextual survey of Exodus chapter 4 shines some light on the wrath of God.  Verse 14 reads, “So the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses and He said: ‘Is not Aaron the Levite your brother?  I know that he can speak well.  And look, he is also coming out to meet you.  When he sees you, he will be glad in his heart’.”[6]  In unpacking this verse, several things must be considered.  First, God is appearing to Moses in the form of a flaming bush.  He is addressing Moses as His chosen vessel to bring the Israelites out of Egypt, and God has previously promised and illustrated to Moses that great power would be executed through Moses.[7] 

Now to the task of defining this anger kindled against Moses.  First, there is no tangible illustration of God’s wrath in this example.  Perhaps it is best likened to a very strong scolding in which the very flames that are representing God are kindled against Moses.  It must be acknowledged that at the very least, this display of wrath was enough to cause Moses to change his mind and cooperate.  Secondly, the text presents that God’s wrath is kindled in response to Moses’ excuses.  Despite the illustration of power in turning the staff into a snake and a healthy hand to a leprous one and then back[8], and despite God’s assurance that He is in control and will be with Moses, the soon to be servant of God is reluctant and full of excuses.  Let it not be confused however, that God’s wrath is not kindled out of mere frustration.  Moses’ repeated reluctance illustrates a deeper fear coupled with a lack of faith, despite being in the presence of God.  As far as the recipient of God’s wrath, it is an unlikely candidate.  Further readings in the Torah show Moses becoming a great leader of the Israelite nation.  Serving as liberator, miracle worker, and advocate, Moses will soon solidify himself as one of the greatest men of God to ever live.  Frank Mead emphatically praises Moses as a man who “…left his mark on the social structure, thinking, ethics, and religion of all humanity.”[9]  Consequently, it is a bit disheartening to discover that God does not withhold His wrath from those whom He sets aside to perform His service.  Perhaps it is even for this reason that God would show His wrath to Moses; as a form of Divine discipline in order to strengthen His chosen vessel.

Moving on to the prophecies of the Old Testament, Isaiah chapter 5 shines new light on the complex subject of God’s wrath.  Verse 25 reads,

Therefore the anger of the Lord is aroused against His peoples; He has stretched out His hand against them and stricken them, and the hills trembled.  Their carcasses were as refuse in the midst of the streets.  For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.[10]

In this passage a more visual account of God’s wrath is presented.  Again, some contextual aspects must be considered.  As a prophetic writing, Isaiah is foretelling the future of Judah.  Under the rule of kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, the people of Judah have continued to stray from God and ignore the teachings of His Law.[11]  Despite the deeds of several good kings (Uzziah and Jotham), the people of Judah have offered sacrifices to animals along with an arsenal of other offenses.  God’s response is not only stern, but also violent. 

In this depiction of God’s wrath the hills shake and the hand of God strikes down the people of Judah.  Isaiah is prophesying that when God enacts His wrath, it will result in death!  The bodies of the people of Judah will lay desolate in the streets and God will refuse to draw back His anger.  This time, it is not due to a lack of faith, but due to disobedience that God calls upon His mighty Hand.  The Scripture leaves no room for debate; the people of Judah will be punished because of their disobedience in worshiping idols, offering sacrifices to other gods, and participating in other deeds contrary to the Law of Moses and the Ten Commandments.  Again, it is frightening to learn that God is making His own people the victims of His wrath.  At this point God has already lead the people out of Egypt, given them territories in the Promised Land, blessed the people under the period of judges, and even allowed a monarchy to be established according to the request of the people.  He has been with His people and servants like Joshua, Caleb, David, Solomon, and Samson have received the blessing of God, the discipline of God in some cases, but in every case have been used by God to further His purposes.  Despite stumbling several times along the way, the previously mentioned characters had remained loyal to God and had been obedient to His requests by and large.  Unfortunately, the people of Judah have not followed suite and the consequence is the unleashing of Divine wrath.

Turning now to the writings of the Old Testament, David calls upon the wrath of God in the 7^th Psalm,

Arise, O Lord, in Your anger; Lift Yourself up because of the rage of my enemies; Rise up for me to the judgment You have commanded!  So the congregations of the peoples shall surround You; For their sakes, therefore return on high.  The Lord shall judge the peoples; judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according to my integrity within me.[12]

According to tradition, this Psalm was recorded in response to Cush, a member of the tribe of Benjamin who had wronged King David.  In this passage, God’s wrath is presented in the form of a judgment.  Although it is not clear what the inaction of God’s wrath will look like, it is expected in the form of Divine justice.  Furthermore, in this case, God’s wrath is presented as a resource to be called upon by those who have been treated unjustly.  Derek Kidner brilliantly explains the role of God in Psalm 7 when he writes, “It is one of several passages showing God’s exaltation as judge, victor and lawgiver”.[13]  The implication is that because David has been mistreated, God will employ His wrath by judging the unjust and presumably restoring justice to David.  In this case, the recipient of God’s wrath is a member of the tribe of Benjamin, the youngest son of Israel.  Unfortunately however, Cush has positioned himself as an opponent of King David, a man after God’s own heart and the chosen King of Israel.  Therefore, although Cush is one of God’s chosen people, he is also an enemy of God’s chosen king.  Therefore it must be concluded that Cush serves as both a child of God and an opponent of God.  Here, God’s wrath against those who oppose Him, rather than simply disobey Him, is given some attention.   

            Finally to the New Testament, where Paul gives writes on the wrath of God in his Letter to the Ephesians.  Verse 6 of chapter 5 reads, “Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these thing the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.”[14]  In context, Paul has just recorded a list of habitual practices that disqualify one from the inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ.[15]  The list serves as a warning to the newly converted Ephesians, Roman gentiles, to avoid any unholy or unrighteous deeds for the sake of avoiding God’s wrath.  It is implied that the alternative to god’s wrath is an inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and therefore the reverse is also true.  Here, God’s wrath is portrayed as Him withholding the Kingdom of His Son from the “sons of disobedience”.  While such wrath could entail other consequences, at the very least it is illustrated as exclusion from the Kingdom.  Again, the cause is disobedience but not necessarily to the Law of Moses or even the Ten Commandments.  Paul is corresponding with a group of gentiles who would not have been familiar with the Old Testament legalities.  They are however familiar with practices of fornication, idolatry, covetousness, and so on.  Here, a universal standard of righteousness is acknowledged.  Despite lacking any knowledge of the Old Testament, the gentiles are expected to avoid these unrighteous acts.  Disobedience is the catalyst for the wrath of God being enacted.  The fact that the recipients of such wrath are Gentiles does give some new insight into this attribute of the Divine however.  At the time Paul penned his letter to the Ephesians, the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the subsequent movement of Christianity is being spread about both the Jewish world and the Hellenistic Roman world.  Essentially, the God of the Old Testament is now completely open to all peoples.  Unfortunately, the consequence of an all-inclusive God is that in opening Himself to everyone, God is allowing the possibility of being rejected by anyone.  At this point in time, anyone could become a servant of God but in ignoring His standard, anyone could now be found guilty of not only disobedience, but also rejection of God.

            In summary, each of these four portions of the Cannon gives examples of God’s wrath, what it looks like, what causes it, and who gets it.  Using the whole of this investigation, a Biblical definition of God’s wrath can be constructed.  First, God’s wrath has many manifestations.  In some cases God shows His wrath in a manner likened to a Divine scolding.  In others, death, justice, and even exclusion from the Kingdom of Christ are the manifestations of Divine wrath.  Certainly other illustrations exist, some tangible and others intangible, but no further research is necessary to conclude that the wrath of God cannot be limited to any one response.  Essentially, God has a multitude of options in manifesting His wrath and throughout the Scriptures He illustrates that regardless of how His wrath is enacted, it is always something to be feared and avoided.  Furthermore, as the passages from Isaiah and Ephesians illustrate (and arguably Exodus and Psalms as well), God’s wrath can be used as a warning to obey the One who formed creation.

            Skipping ahead for a moment, the wrath of God shows no favoritism.  The recipients of this dreadful attribute range from Jews to Gentiles, from servants to adversaries, from Old Testament to New Testament, and from instructed Israelites to newly converted Romans.  There is no demographic that is excluded from the wrath of God.  At this point, the definition of God’s wrath being constructed has little clarity.  It has no specific form or mode and anyone is susceptible to receiving it.  Only in reverting back to the catalyst for God’s wrath, is a clear and concise definition of God’s wrath able to final come to fruition.

            With varying modes of action and a universally inclusive range of possible recipients, the only common denominator pertaining to the wrath of God is the catalyst for it.  Whether it is faithlessness, disobedience, or acting against the universal moral code, God’s wrath is always triggered by rebellion.  If God is the perfect Creator, and humanity if His imperfect creation, then the sheer impossibility of avoiding rebellion makes complete adherence to God unfathomable.  As Romans 3:23 reads, “…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”.[16]  In one of the greatest sermons ever written, Jonathan Edwards describes this unfortunate state when he pens, “The sword of divine justice is every moment brandished over their heads, and it is nothing but the hand of arbitrary mercy, and God’s mere will, that holds it back”.[17]  With this understanding, an even greater difficulty arises.  If God’s wrath can be enacted in such a wide variety of forms; and if anyone is at risk of being on the receiving end of such wrath; and if the only certainty regarding God’s wrath is that it is the result of rebellion; then what does that say to a humanity that is also informed that they stand no chance of living a completely loyal life?  The answer to that question is not only the message of the Gospel, but the reason a healthy understanding of God’s wrath must be taught, defended, and acquired.

            In investigating exactly what the Bible says in regards to the wrath of God, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that Romans 3:23 is precisely correct and that every creature throughout the history of mankind is not only susceptible, but deserving of God’s wrath.  Ironically, it is not only the theologian or preacher who recognizes this truth.  This terrible state that man finds himself in is the reason Dawkins, Harris, and the like argue that there can be no God.  Essentially, the focus of God’s wrath given by the new atheist movement is to arrive at the conclusion that if God is going to bully humanity by showering it with His wrath, then science will refuse to accept Him.  At the same time, it is this great Biblical truth that forces authors like Bell to over emphasize characteristics of God like love and mercy, in order to minimize (or completely ignore) giving any attention to the difficult characteristic of God’s wrath.  Fortunately, God makes no apologies for His being, and neither needs those who follow Him.

            The beauty of the Easter story is that Christ came to die for the depraved humanity previously discussed.  In His own words Jesus confesses, “I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance”[18].  Given the definition of wrath previously constructed, it is quite apparent that no one is exempt from the wrath of God.  Although it may not have a specific form, and every member of humanity may be deserving of it, the wrath of God is not to be ignored or minimized, but celebrated.  Paul presents why this is the case in his letter to the Romans.  He writes, “…Having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him”[19]. 

Certainly the skeptics are correct in acknowledging the impossibility of appeasing a God who is full of wrath.  Additionally, Christianity becomes a much easier product when sold in the package of love and mercy.  However, it is not only unnecessary, but also irresponsible for the Christian to undercut the Gospel by ignoring the consequence of rebellion that would be destined to humanity if it were not for the sacrifice of Christ on the cross.  What the new atheist portrays as Divine injustice, the Christian must understand and present as the natural cause and effect of human rebellion.  Only then can the sacrifice of Christ be understood completely for what it is.  In the sermon The Wrath of God Against Ungodliness and Unrighteousness, Baptist theologian John Piper recognizes that, “We need the Gospel because the wrath of God is being revealed” (My emphasis added).[20]

Without consequences for sins, the sacrifice of Christ is useless.  Furthermore, if there was any possible way to avoid these consequences, the sacrifice of Christ is not justifiable.  However, with a complete understanding of God’s wrath; how severe it is; why it happens; who is responsible; and the ultimate conclusion that it is the destiny of anyone without the blood of Christ; the Christian can counter the skeptic, encourage the timid believer, and share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with a world who, whether they choose to believe or not, is on a collision coarse with the wrath of Almighty God without the sacrifice of Christ.  The reality of God’s wrath and the desperate need for Christ cannot be separated.  In conclusion, the words of R.C. Sproul serve not only as a plea to take seriously the wrath of God, but a warning to all whom would ignore it.

The tragedy for us is that in spite of the clear warnings of Scripture, and of the sober teaching of Jesus on this subject, we continue to be at ease in Zion with respect to the future punishment of the wicked.  If God is to be believed at all we must face the awful truth that someday His furious wrath will be poured out.[21]

---

[1] Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Boston:  Houghton Mifflin, 2006), 31.

[2] Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster?  (Grand Rapids:  Baker Publishing Group, 2011), 19.

[3] P. Volz, Das Damonische in Jahwe (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1924).

[4] Rob Bell, Love Wins (New York: HarperOne, 2011).

[5] David Faust, Faith Under Fire: Transforming Power from 1 and 2 Peter (Cincinnati, Ohio: The Standard Publishing Company, 1997), 70.

[6] Ex. 4:14 NKJV

[7] Ex. 4:11-12

[8] Ex. 4: 3-7

[9] Frank Mead, Who’s Who in the Bible (New York: Galahad Books, 1934), 47.

[10] Isa. 5:25 NKJV

[11] 2 Chr. 26:1-32:21 NKJV

[12] Ps. 7:6-8 NKJV

[13] Derek Kidner, Psalms 1-72: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1973), 64.

[14] Eph. 5:6 NKJV

[15] Eph. 5:3-5

[16] Rom. 3:23 NKJV

[17] Jonathan Edwards, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” (Sermon presented in Enfield Connecticut, July 8, 1741).

[18] Mt. 9:13 NKJV

[19] Rom. 5:9

[20] John Piper, “The Wrath of God Against Ungodliness and Unrighteousness” (Sermon presented at Bethel Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota, August 30, 1998).

[21] R.C. Sproul, The Holiness of God (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1985), 227.

Commentary on John 6:1-15

Each gospel gives a different account or perspective on who Jesus was and what His ministry was like.  Appropriately, this text from John 6 gives this particular author’s depiction of the only miracle recorded in all four gospels.  From a historical critical standpoint, this agreement validates the authenticity of the event described, and also suggests the importance of the event to the overall ministry of Jesus.  Certainly communal meals play a vital role in the ministry and message of the New Testament.  Consequently this text should be of the utmost importance to the reader.

The text is significant for two reasons.  To begin, it shows the power and authority possessed by Jesus of Nazareth.  Only one who possessed the power of God Almighty would be capable of producing so much out of so little.  In fact, the miracle is so unbelievable that it serves as the tipping point for the launch of Jesus’ political campaign by those present.  Having already witnessed the healing miracles of Jesus, one would assume that this crowd would have expected the miraculous.  Still, Jesus’ multiplication of the loaves and fish affirms once and for all that He is the real deal. 

            In addition to bearing witness to the power and authority of Jesus, this miracle tells us something very important about our Savior.  At no point does anyone from the crowd ask Jesus to feed them.  One would think that the crowd would have had the foresight to pack a lunch.  While there is certainly some resonance between this miracle and the miraculous feeding of the Israelites in the wilderness, one doesn’t sense the same urgency, as the people aren’t going to starve if this miracle doesn’t take place.  And yet Jesus perceives a need.  Perhaps the crowd really did need to be feed, or maybe they needed to witness this miracle in order to comprehend the “Bread of Life” discourse that is to follow.  At any rate, Jesus perceives the need of His people and meets it before any of them can even ask.

            Everything is fine and dandy until the crowd takes things into their own hands.  Having witnessed the power and authority of Jesus, the crowd determines that they want Jesus to be their king.  I am sure of a presidential candidate pulled something like this off we would all do the same thing.  The crowd attempts to force Jesus to be their king, and at this juncture Jesus departs. 

            Jesus’ departure suggests that the Savior works on His own terms (or God’s terms).  How often we want Jesus to act on our own behalf and try to manipulate our faith to our own ends.  Yet this text doesn’t allow us such a luxury.  Often time people believe that if they just have faith then Jesus will do whatever it is that they want.  But the lesson from this text is the exact opposite.  Jesus meets our needs, even if we ourselves do not perceive them.  At the same time, Jesus will not be manipulated to do the will of His followers.  So it is that the Christian is responsible for his proximity to Jesus, while Jesus is responsible for the well being of the Christian.  Let Jesus be Jesus and He will give us all that we need.