Could You Spot Judas?

Mike Leake

“He appointed the twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons.”

Be with Jesus.

Preach.

Drive out demons.

Picture that ministry in your mind. What was the preaching like? What would you conclude about the powerful ministry where the works of darkness are being overturned? And what must we say about the preacher who has “been with Jesus”?

Now check out who appears in the list of those appointed by Jesus.

“…and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.”

Sit with that for a moment.

There is absolutely no indication that anything was “off” in Judas’ preaching ministry. No indication that he was the guy in the group who just couldn’t seem to drive out demons. And there’s no indication that he was always lurking in the shadows and being the weird guy in the group.

There is no indication that when Jesus said, “one of you will betray me” all eyes suddenly lit upon Judas. This means that his preaching was at least adequate. There was nothing that caused the other disciples to shake their head at his weird take upon the good news. Every sign pointed to Judas being one of the gang.

What Does This Mean?

A few weeks ago my wife and I stumbled upon this show on Peacock called Traitors. It’s a ridiculous show, honestly. But it hooked us and so we kept watching to the end. The concept of the show is that there are 20 people in a house, three of them are traitors. If you spent any time in youth group it’s like a glorified game of Mafia.

In order to win the money, you have to spot the traitors, banish them from the group, and then split the money with your other survivors. Or if you are one of the three traitors, your goal is to “kill” everybody without being spotted as a traitor.

What is amazing to me about this show is that the ones who are traitors are typically the last person that others would expect. It’s comical as some of the contestants say things like, “I would stake my life on it not being Person X”. But it absolutely is person X.

This show is an illustration of a painful reality of humanity–we aren’t skilled at spotting monsters in our midst. That isn’t necessarily dangerous, but what makes it dangerous is that we think we are amazing at spotting the traitor.

This is how Judas, or any other fraudulent leader, is able to last so long within an organization. They make themselves the least suspecting. Those who work with organizations battling sexual abuse tell us that it’s not only a child that is groomed, it is everyone around them as well. Judas fits in.

I would love to give you 8 steps to spotting a Judas in your mix. But my point here is simple. You and I probably can’t spot Judas. That doesn’t mean that we should always view others with suspicion or to develop an unhelpfully cynical view of humanity. Eleven disciples weren’t Judas.

But it does mean that we ought to be aware of this reality. Don’t ever say, “It could never be Person X” and bend the rules for such a person. If there is a way to spot a Judas it’s not found in results of ministry, it’s not found in eloquent speech, it’s not even found in what he/she appears to be treasuring.

We are probably healthiest when we do not treat people with unwarranted suspicion but also when we aren’t surprised by depravity. True discernment will be grounded in hope instead of suspicion. It also doesn’t insulate anyone from the reality of human depravity. Trying to root out Judas isn’t the answer. But denying the obvious when he rears his ugly head isn’t the answer either.

When You Should Be Silent About Jesus

Mike Leake

nick-fewings-eMwZP7NL6a4-unsplash

I suppose there are some recommendations that you don’t want.

“He trained me in fielding ground balls.” –Bill Buckner

“Taught us everything we know about singing.” –Milli Vanilli

“He’s financially creative. I’ve learned much from him.” –Charles Ponzi

“His views on group dynamics and leadership are top shelf. I’m a disciple.” –Charles Manson

“I’ve used him for my taxes for over a decade now.” –Al Capone

11 And whenever the unclean spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, “You are the Son of God.” 12 And he strictly ordered them not to make him known.

It’s pretty obvious why Jesus didn’t want demons to be leading the charge on his public relations. It wouldn’t be long after that the religious leaders were charging Jesus with driving out demons by the power of demons. As non-sensical as that sounds, it’d have been an easier sell if the demons were the ones telling people that Jesus was the Son of God.

But there is something else happening here in Mark. It’s not only demons who are silenced, but in Mark 8, we’ll see the apostle Peter charged with not telling anyone that Jesus is the Son of God. It won’t be until his crucifixion that this declaration is made. Why?

Because a premature expression of Jesus’ identity would have led to much confusion. If people were going to wildly misunderstand what it meant for him to be Messiah, or Son of God, then it would be detrimental.

It’s dangerous when precious words aren’t combined with precious character. And it’s dangerous when precious words are used for an unholy end. The demonic declaration of truth, that Jesus is the Son of God, would have been used by them to perpetuate harm instead of worship.

Because of this Jesus essentially tells the demons to “shut up”. He muzzles them. True words can be used for treacherous things. And good words can be used for nefarious ends. When that’s the case Jesus tells demons, or us, to shut it.

I appreciate what Diane Langberg says here,

We are easily seduced by good words that touch our longings and desires; we frequently make the mistake of assuming those words are true because we want them to be true, not because we have seen character that demonstrates their truth. When we get glimpses, hints that raise questions, we deny the warnings because we so desperately want what we have heard to be true. Do patients trust therapists, people trust pastors, students trust teachers, men and women trust each other, girls and boys trust pedophiles, and entire nations trust politicians because their words sound good. But good words can hide bad material and bad goals. Good words can whitewash evil. (Langberg, Redeeming Power, 50)

But we see in this little passage that Jesus is different. Jesus is concerned with actual truth. Rather than having a PR campaign where people call Him the Son of God, but do so without an actual understanding, He’d rather wait until they knowingly profess. He silences the demonic because though they are speaking the truth, they do so with wicked intent and with character bent toward harm.

If you’re using good words for bad ends or with wicked intentions. Jesus is saying the same thing to you that he was saying to the demons so many years ago…

Silence.

—

Photo source: here

A brief History of “Ackchyually…”

Mike Leake

DpQ9YJl

Americans now believe that having equal rights in a political system also means that each person’s opinion about anything must be accepted as equal to anyone else’s. –Thomas Nichols, The Death of Expertise

Have you seen the meme of the nerdy looking dude saying “Akshually…”? It’s because we are all a little annoyed by a supposed expert entering into a conversation and saying, “well, akshually….” and then spitting some alternate facts. (There is a whole episode of The Office dedicated to this).

Here in Southwest MO, we have one of the best meteorologist in the nation. Doug Heady knows his stuff. He’s truly an expert. And yet it’s amusing to me that he’ll get slammed on social media by people who have only a very limited knowledge of the field. “Well akshually….”

This happens even more in church settings, because we have something called the priesthood of the believer. We believe that the Holy Spirit dwells within every believer and we have equal access to God, through Jesus Christ. Because of this, what Nichols mentions here runs rampant within the church.

A couple hundred years ago, John Newton mentioned this to a young John Ryland, Jr.

That sovereign power, which the Independents assume over their ministers, appears to me too great to be trusted in such hands.  If a man ranks as member of a Church of Christ, however ignorant, illiterate and illiberal he may be, though he has seen and known nothing beyond the bounds of his parish, though his temper be sour, and his spirit obstinate as a mule, still he thinks himself both qualified and authorized to teach his pastor.  Half a dozen persons of this description are sufficient to make a minister and a whole congregation uneasy through life.  Whatever burden we are supposed to have in the Establishment, we are free from this.  And I would be thankful for it.  (Wise Counsel, 223)

Going back even further, Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390) cautioned against everybody “doing theology”. He was debating the Gnostics. These were the OG conspiracy theorist. They’d “well akshually…” those like Gregory who’d given themselves to years of theological study.

Not to every one, my friends, does it belong to philosophise about God–not to every one. The subject is not so cheaply acquired, nor is it for earth-bound minds. And I will add, not before every audience, nor at all times, nor on all points; but on certain occasions, and before certain persons, and within certain limits. (From Theological Orations, Book 1)

I’ll admit, I kind of bristle at what Gregory and Newton say here. And there is a bit of history that came after Gregory’s words which ought to give us some caution.

After Gregory

I’m not entirely blaming this on Gregory. His view was somewhat widespread, and at the time I believe it was entirely necessary. How do you reign in the “special knowledge” which the Gnostics claimed to have? These Early Church Fathers did what John the Apostle did in 1 John; they go back to the source. Who is connected to Jesus? Who is teaching that which is consistent with Christ? To sum, they appeal to expertise.

But there is a consequence to this as well. A few hundred years after Gregory we read this in the Decree of the Council of Toulouse (1229):

“We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.”

It could be argued that the Dark Ages comes from taking things like Gregory’s words to their logical extreme. Much corruption came from the people being ignorant and solely dependent upon “gate-keepers” to provide truth. This is why the religious establishment hated John Wycliffe and William Tyndale so much.

Even in 1536, after the Protestant Reformation, the Church of England forbade a common person owning or reading the Bible. This was to control learning. It was to legislate what Gregory spoke of 1,000 years prior.

Tyndale’s dying words were that he would “cause a boy who drives a plow to know more of the Scriptures than the pope.”

The Fruit of Tyndale

The vision which Tyndale had has won the day. Any “boy who drives the plow” is able to have all of the Scriptures and mounds of information at his fingertips. The pope has no more access to the Scriptures—or other knowledge—than you or I have.

There are many good things which have come from this. For one, I think of the #MeToo movement. Until social media, survivors had to go through gate-keepers to tell their story. Often, they were silenced at that step. There are good things that have comes from having access to both information and platform.

And it’s not lost on me that I’ll be able to hit “publish” and this piece will enter into the public space without a single gate-keeper telling me I can’t say this. The only regulation is whether or not my platform has enough reach to be heard. Or if I pay enough money to assist this in going “viral”.

But those benefits also become problematic. We end up with no guardrails. The “well akshually” nerd has just as much of a platform as someone who has given years to his/her craft. In fact, if he knows how to game the system well enough—his platform will be bigger.

There are two ways to become an expert today:

  1. 10,000 hours of hard work.
  2. A YouTube channel and a platform on which to share your “expertise”.

Most are opting for the second. We aren’t healthy. We are able to consume all of the knowledge we want. But consumption doesn’t make an expert. What is needed is deep attention and wisdom. We’re lacking in these areas.

Are we moving into a new Dark Ages, where we have all the information we need but no system by which to process it? We have access to any information we want but no ability to discern what is truly good or even what we need to advance as a society.

Conclusion

I don’t believe the path of Tyndale or Gregory is entirely the right one. Gregory dreamed of self-regulation. His words are a call for humility in learning. It’s also a call for leaders to disciple.

But humility and discipleship are hard practices. It’s far easier for leaders to control rather than disciple. And it’s a broad way to take short cuts and seat yourself in the position of honor. Why put in 10,000 hours when I can watch an hour of YouTube and become an “expert”?

While we are still broken people, living in a broken world we will take the easy path. But the way of Christ is one marked with humility and discipleship. It’s one where we learn to humbly limit ourselves. And it’s one where leaders open up access as they are in the process of discipleship. It’s where leaders are open to hear and listen and eventually share the platform.

I don’t know the answer, really. Nor, do I know the proper balance. But I do know that Gregory and Tyndale need one another.

And now, I’ll hit publish because we’re living in Tyndale’s world, for good or ill….

What Was Jesus’ Relationship With the Crowds?

Mike Leake

rob-curran-sUXXO3xPBYo-unsplash“I don’t have any money for gas, and I have to take my four year old in for brain surgery tomorrow, and I just started this new job, and I don’t get paid for another week…oh, and what time are your services, I’m looking for a church…”

I notice the meth sores. I smell the cigarette smoke. I can see the glazed over look in her eyes.

I also saw them pull up into the parking lot. Nice car. There’s a dude out there, probably in his twenties, clearly strung out on something—and now making his lady go in to beg for some cash. I don’t see a car seat.

It’s that last line of her speech that kills me. I’ve heard it so many times before. She’s learned that if a pastor or church thinks they might have a potential disciple they’ll be more inclined to opening the coffers.

This lady isn’t sincere. She is trying to play us. She wants church money to buy meth.

If you have limited resources in the face of seemingly unlimited need, you have to make judgment calls like this all the time. Should you help somebody who isn’t all that serious? Should you help somebody who is “coming to Jesus” for all the wrong reasons?

I end up telling her that we don’t have the resources right now to help. She leaves in an angry huff, upset that the church doesn’t care about her daughter enough to give $20 for gas so she can get her brain surgery.

What Would Jesus Do?

What do I do with this?

I think about situations like this when I read about Jesus feeding the 5,000. They didn’t pack their own lunch. They weren’t taking responsibility. The gospel accounts, especially in John, tell us that they are fickle. They aren’t serious disciples.

But what does Jesus do? He says, “you feed them…”

I also think of these decisions when I read something like Mark 3:7-10,

7 Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed. 8 When they heard about all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon. 9 Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him. 10 For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him.

Mark is clearly framing these would-be disciples as fickle. They only want to follow Jesus for what they think they can get from him. They are so misinformed and self-conceited that they’ll trample over Jesus just to get a potential healing touch. They aren’t interested in His person. This isn’t discipleship, this is just an excited crowd hoping to get a little touch of goodness.

But what does Jesus do? He tells the disciples to get a boat ready because things could get out of hand. But he also stays for a bit. He doesn’t immediately flee. He meets the crowd where they are.

We need to wrestle with this for a little bit. Jesus isn’t about simply gathering a crowd. He is after deeper discipleship. There is a sub-thread that runs through the gospel accounts where Jesus is constantly trying to escape the crowds. But woven into that thread is another thread—Jesus’ compassion. He still ministers to the crowd, even when they are insincere.

If Jesus were to define his relationship status with the crowds, he’d have to put “it’s complicated”. The crowds here are both a thing to be celebrated—Jesus’ ministry is thriving in spite of the religious leaders opposition. But it also serves as a potential danger.

Maybe I should have forked over that $20…

Should I Have Given the $20?

Jesus’ complicated relationship with the crowds is also seen in places like Luke 4:40-44. The people are begging for Jesus to stay—but he leaves so he can preach the gospel elsewhere. He doesn’t give the $20 it seems.

I believe the Scriptures call us to both compassion and wisdom. Jesus knew His mission. This is why at times He’d stop for a couple hours and chat with a Samaritan woman, but at other times he’d pack up bags and head elsewhere when there was still ministry to be done.

I don’t think the Scriptures call us to an easy answer on these questions. There is not a “you must always give $20” type of answer. Nor is there a “you must never give that $20” answer. We’re called to trust the Spirit and use the wisdom and compassion that God gives to us. Cold, distant, and uncaring attitudes are not permissible. But neither are irresponsible ones.

Conclusion

I think I made the right decision…kind of.

Looking back upon this now, I believe that I should have been bold and brave enough to tell the lady exactly why I wasn’t going to meet her request and invite her into a deeper conversation. Invite her into getting more profound help.

What do you think?

—

Photo source: here