​Galatians 2: 11 – 21.
 
Amidst a glaringly candid narrative of an earlier reprehensible encounter at Antioch between the apostles, Peter and Paul, and by implication, James (Gal 2:11-12), Paul interjected one of Scriptures’ most profound dictum (viz., Gal 2:20). What was the underlying factor which initiated this rather remarkable declaration? Some clarification to the Antioch incident may be necessary. The arrival of Jewish believers sent by James from Jerusalem, on a fact-finding mission, altered Peter’s behavior towards dining with Gentile believers. Barnabas, Paul’s co-worker, and other Jewish members likewise withdrew from eating with non-Jews. The controversy was over kosher meal preparation and dining arrangement that were exclusive to the Jews. Peter, despite his earlier visions with respect to Cornelius, which categorically included Gentiles into the faith community (Acts 10), seemed to vacillate in the presence of representatives from the mother church. His apparent chauvinism launched Paul into a confrontation with racial and theological overtones (Gal 2:15-21), propounding that Jewish believers are not made righteous with God by them observing the law, but through faith in Jesus Christ. So, if they no longer observed the detailed tenets of the law, they are not sinning against the law because they have died to the law through Christ. Christ bore their punishment at the cross and paid the price for their sins – He fulfilled the law on their behalf and set them free from the curse of the law (c.f., Gal 3:11-14; Gal 3:22-29). In reality, Christ by His Spirit lives in us and in living our lives, we therefore, only express Him exclusively (Gal 2:20; John 14;15-17). 
 
The importance of a true representation of the gospel was a priority over any apostolic harmony, as misrepresenting it, totally undercuts the basis of our salvation, of sins forgiven, and reconciliation with God, irrespective of Jew or Gentile (c.f., Gal 1:8-9). James and Peter did not anticipate how the Gentiles’ coming into the faith would complicate Jewish practices at the time. But Paul had thought through its repercussions, having experienced the interactions between the Christian Jewish diaspora with Gentile believers during his first missionary journey in Asia Minor. Nevertheless, the controversies persisted, until the Council at Jerusalem finally settled them. In humility and with the wise guidance of the Holy Spirit, the plurality of Christian leaders in the mother church decided to chart a new course in matters of practice with respect to the law for all believers (Acts 15:1-21). Even today, in matters concerning the law and the practice of faith, quite apart from the theological elements which undergird them, it has not always been clear-cut to delineate and accommodate the perplexities of the modern life. What we are certain about is that the practice of Biblical truth cannot be devoid of the presence of ‘agape.’ To be more like Jesus is to learn to walk in step with His Holy Spirit on the basis of His substitutionary atonement, with the unswerving love of Christ. That was how the Apostle Paul saw himself when he declared that “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me” (Gal 2:20). The gospel is the commencement of a discipleship process that leads us towards spiritual maturation in community with other believers (c.f., Eph 3:16-19); a transformation that would make us more Christ-like (Gal 4:19). That is the consequence of Jesus’ death and resurrection (viz., our justification and sanctification) - the fruit of the Cross of Christ. 

​Habakkuk 2-3
 
Habakkuk was astounded by God’s decision to resolve Judah’s lawlessness with a Babylonian invasion. Having earlier vented his sarcastic prayer, he was in fact waiting for God’s disapproval over his oppositional opinion (2:1). To Habakkuk’s credit, he was willing to keep a watch over his nation and to listen to Yahweh’s explanation (2:1). To reach this point of letting God be God, Habakkuk’s had to be prepared to put aside his anger and impatience resulting from his personal experiences of violence and injustice in Judah, and attempt to grasp God’s perspective, whatever that was! What followed was a rare interaction as God hardly ever justify His reasons or plans to humans. But here, He lucidly informed Habakkuk that Babylon would certainly be judged for her atrocities, as national justice and equity are important to Him as He is still Lord over all creation (2:2-20).   
 
The normal human response to unrelenting inequity and lawlessness is to either remain silent and let things be, or clandestinely or openly push back. The Scriptures give us a different view when we perceive that God is at work: Job patiently waited through God’s trial, and even at its conclusion, the real purpose was not disclosed to him (c.f., Job 23:10); Paul counted it a privilege to be undergoing tribulations, knowing that persevering through it produces character and hope (Rom 5:3-5); and James reminded us that we do not predetermine our own future as it is in God’s ever competent hands (Jam 4:13-17). 
 
Once God had deconstructed the basis of His intentions over Babylon’s arrogance and oppression, Habakkuk again went into prayer. On this occasion, however, his tone was remarkably devoid of insinuations against God’s plan, but focused vulnerably on Yahweh’s status and power (3:1-19). To wait patiently for God’s solution is a mark of humility, a purposeful surrendering which is a rare human quality in today’s fast track world where we are goaded to achieve a decent outcome. Listening to God spell out His judgments overwhelmed Habakkuk’s own self-centred concerns and priorities; a realization that God’s purpose went far beyond what the human mind or eye can ever comprehend or see, as God’s righteousness ensures that He will be unquestionably fair in all His decisions (2:20). Our humanness incessantly informs us that those who relate to us are there to serve us, and this mindset is unconsciously applied towards God; sadly, we almost always take God for granted until we find ourselves in a bind! Our most poignant spiritual lessons are usually learnt at the lowest points in our life, and at this point, Habakkuk knew that God will walk with him through his trials even though the fig trees, the vines, the olive trees and the fields produce no fruit, and fields are devoid of sheep and cattle. Some major decisions in our life, at times are best deferred, as we wait on God’s timing. As God’s wisdom and faithfulness began to sink in, Habakkuk’s final refrain was like a flash of light piercing into his darkness: instead of looking at the dismal circumstances in his own nation and bothering about the Babylonians, it was safe to trust God for Judah’s eventual redemption. The reality of simply trusting in Yahweh resulted in an outpouring of joyfulness – which nothing in his circumstances could replicate or detract from it. ‘Yet I will exult in the Lord, I will rejoice in the God of my salvation. The Lord God is my strength, and He has made my feet like hinds’ feet, and makes me walk on my high places’ (3:17-19). It is always safe to trust in Yahweh.

​Luke 3: 1 - 20
 
A reading of the gospels may provide a view that Jesus’ ministry in Galilee often eclipsed the message of John the Baptist, but Luke’s Gospel presented a perspective that John presaged the arrival of the Messiah. In those days, the Jews believed that they would escape the coming judgment by Yahweh, simply due to their special relationship as His chosen people and as Abraham’s descendants. Although John’s conception of the gospel was pre-crucifixion (v.18), he preached a markedly different judgment theology, calling them to repentance (vv.3-6). In a nutshell, he warned them that they would not escape God’s judgment, and that God was more than able ‘from these stones to call forth children to Abraham.’ The hyperbole is obvious. What is said implied that God can bring others who are not Jews to be His children, who possess Abraham’s character and nature, vv.7-9; cf. Roms 4:11-12, 16-17; Gal 3:7,29. The overlap of John’s message with his cousin’s was seamless, paving the way for the gospel of salvation.
 
Many repented at John’s warnings, but what does repentance look like as the Jews turn their backs on their religious and racial pedigrees to trust in the mercy of God? First of all, there is a requirement that his followers bear fruits in keeping with it (vv.8-9). Luke mentioned three broad groups of enquirers, viz., the crowds, tax collectors and soldiers, and his exhortations were instructionally specific to each. Was there a reason for Luke to mention just these three groups? An obvious observation would be that these groups represented only a wider distribution of professions, and John’s remonstrations were inclusive. The animosities the commoners have toward the tax collectors and soldiers, who were part of the despised Roman occupation establishment were widely felt. But repentance leveled the playing field, and with it the elimination of enmities between enemies. Repenting of their culpability and accepting the mercy of God has only one outcome – a desire and readiness to extend that same mercy to others. Furthermore, Luke’s intention was to emphasize to Theophilus, who was likely a high-ranking Roman official, the abuse of power inherent within the administrative system and the availability of God’s mercy for forgiveness and hope, to those who repented. 
 
To repent meant they had to behave differently towards each other as the nuanced exhortations implied. The disenfranchised, the mainstay of John’s audience, were instructed to share what little necessities they possessed, viz., clothing and food, with those even less fortunate than themselves (vv.10-11; cf. Heb 13:5). It was apparent that abuse of the taxation system by the tax collectors was a common practice. They were charged to collect what they were instructed to do, no more (vv.12-13). And soldiers were upbraided not to use their lawful authority to extort money or falsely accuse others (v.14), and to be content with their wages, indicating that they could live within their means on their current income. The obsession of accumulating and hoarding wealth spotlighted by John meant an absence of a lifestyle of dependence on God’s mercy and faithfulness, that inevitably drove them towards seeking security and contentment in its accretion, and in illegitimate ways too (Heb 13:5). To value mercy was not only to desist from the exploitation of others, but also to use their resources compassionately to alleviate distress and poverty around them (cf. Micah 6:8). The underlying guide was that they were stewards of all the resources that God has given to them (Ps 24:1; 1 Cor 7:23; 1 Tim 6:7-10). It is a pertinent reminder that these were object lessons prior to the full gospel message that John required – a challenge to our present lifestyle and worldly concerns.

​Exodus 20: 16; John 18: 33 - 40.
 
When Pontius Pilate confronted Jesus at the Praetorium on the charges brought against him by the Sanhedrin, Jesus answered that “only those who are of the truth, hears His voice.” Pilate then rhetorically questioned, “What is truth?” Then turning around, he walked out, and declared Jesus’ innocence before his accusers. For a person who possessed judicial authority over his subjects’ life or death, it seemed incongruent that he would disparagingly question the relevance of truthfulness under the circumstances. However, his subsequently decision by giving in to mob behavior explained his position on the issue of truth. 
 
The 9th commandment of the Decalogue, “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” is Yahweh’s plumb line where truth is concerned (Ex 20:16). Its language is couched in a legalistic context within the covenant community; viz., you shall not testify or give a reply against a neighbour, fellow-citizen, or a companion who stands in reciprocal relationship to you as a member of the group, by lying or providing evasive evidence. The judges were to investigate thoroughly to discern the truth in cases that came before them, and the provision was for at least two witnesses to sustain a charge (Deut 19:15). The penalty for a false accusation was severe, to the extent of loosing one’s life (Deut 19:16-21), and this included refusing to divulge pertinent information, thus creating a false impression of what the facts really are (Lev 5:1). God’s principal concern was that the community’s social cohesion was not sacrificed for personal gain. He was preparing and training His people in Canaan, to bring order amid chaos, to be a holy people, and a kingdom of priests, so that by looking at them, the nations will come to know Him as the true God.
 
The law courts, however, do not have sole responsibility for the discernment of truth telling. We, who are created in God’s image – the imago Dei, are to love truth. As believers, our righteousness is characterized by this fundamental attribute of God Himself (Isa 65:16; Zech 8:19; Eph 4:15,25). Therefore, to mirror truth is to pursue it in everything that involves the people of God (Jn 4:23,24; 14:17; 16:13), to the extent of advancing it equitably and accurately, even if it goes against personal or group interests. Although expressing the truth of a matter may not be welcome on some occasions, our motivation for it (viz., a love for God and neighbour) should nevertheless guide us in our words and deeds. Particularly so in these times, when the post-modern media skirts between actual news reporting and propaganda, complicating what may be just spin and the truth. But the standard that God has set for His people does not change, reinforcing their high moral ground in uprightness, consistency and faithfulness. 
 
There is an additional aspect of truth that is significant, and this is expressed in Jesus Christ, who is truth personified (Jn 14:6 Titus1:2). His response to Pilate indicated that He was not talking about truth abstractly nor philosophically, but about Himself as the revealed truth of God’s eternal plan in coming into this world. It is the Spirit of truth, who lives in us, that would ultimately corroborate what is error or truth (1 Jn 4:6; 5:6) as we listen to His promptings. It becomes inevitable then that the consistency of our testimony of speaking the truth in love before fellow believers in the community and outsiders, would determine the credibility of our faithful witness to the Truth personified.