1 John 5:7-9
Giving
testimony in court used to be something sacred. You would raise your right
hand, place the left hand on the Bible, and swear to tell the whole truth with
God’s help. God was actually invited into the courtroom! That was a different
day.
Today
the character of so many has collapsed to the point that you never know if
someone is going to tell the truth on the stand. Often, if they think they can
get away with it, they will lie. We of course has some very famous liars. For
many of us, the Bill Clinton lying stands out. “I did not have sex.” Hah! To be
proven wrong, there must be physical evidence. Hard to get. So now we erase
hard drives. Oops, I am getting sidetracked again.
Our
text tells us that there are three sources of testimony that John appealed to
that proved Jesus’ identity as the Messianic Son of God. John feels like he is
in the fight of his life in preserving the integrity of the Gospel message
being spread in his day and age. Others were coming in and changing the
foundational blocks on which the Gospel was laid. And he knew that if the
foundation was changed, the whole building would collapse. The Gospel, that for
which he had been exiled, for which so many of his friends and fellow
Jesus-followers had been killed, that Gospel would be emptied of its power.
John’s
argument is that if we accept human testimony, we should certainly accept God’s
testimony. This has been a theme from the beginning of this letter. He had been
an eyewitness to Jesus’ life, burial and post-resurrection appearances. He was
not dealing with a phantom, a ghost, a vision. This was Jesus, fully human and
fully God. Seen, heard, touched and handled.
Part
of the struggle of our society now is the lack of trust in authority, any
authority. The trend blossomed with the baby boomers, into the universities,
and led to the ‘throw off all restraints of the past’ 60’s and 70’s. The social
experiments that began to infect the way people think about personal freedom
and choice is now center stage of the dialogue about marriage, gay, straight or
otherwise. Since there is no authority structure, other than the “as long as I
don’t hurt somebody else” ethic, we have not anchor for our decisions. It is a
failed ethic which thinks of people as isolated individuals rather than an
interconnected and interdependent being.
So
now we have every word up for redefinition based on whatever every individual
wants it to mean. Marriage can now mean man-woman, man-man, woman-woman, and
even woman-dog. There are pushes to include multiple partners in the term.
Parent has gone to ‘anyone who contributes in some way’ to the life. Genetic
material contributions can now carry obligations. Or there can be no genetic
contribution, but that doesn’t mean the ‘parent’ term can’t be applied.
So
when John tells us that God’s testimony should be the deciding factor in the
identity of Jesus, the modern person simply says, “Why?” Since they reject
every authority except their own authority, the authority of God carries no
more weight in a definition than my dog’s opinion. And I don’t even have a dog!
But
for those of us who have submitted our will to His will, God does retain the
right to write definitions. He can tell us what relationships are healthy and
why. He can tell us about Himself and how we can properly relate to Him. He can
tell us about ourselves and we must accept His definition.