“The gospel is this: We are more sinful and flawed in ourselves than we ever dared believe, yet at the very same time we are more loved and accepted in Jesus Christ than we ever dared hope.” ~Tim Keller


If the Gospel is an open question for you, you probably have 100 problems, 1000 questions, 5 objections, it might be a long list.  What I’d like to suggest is a radical idea. Clear all of that off the table for a minute and ask 1 question.

Did Jesus really rise from the dead? 

Because if He did, He can answer any question, solve any problem, quiet any objection. And for everyone who hears this, this is VERY good news. The world is filled with reasons not to go, it’s too cold, there’s no rain, the soil is bad. But I want to challenge you. Make the trip, see for yourself. Taste and see that the Lord is good. Think deeply about these stories that have come down to us to help us. Have a piece of fish, and let that blow your mind!

Know that the Resurrection is not just for Jesus, but it’s for us as well. When He opened that door, He opened it for all of us - His power can restore us, right here, right now, today. And on that final day, all the ones who have passed away will rise again and stand in the presence of God, Who is both loving and holy. And we’ll give an account of what we did with the Gifts He has given us.

Here's a recent message from the Surge, exploring this idea, and below is a single section, pulled from that message!

_______________________________

I'm not Aquinas (just in case anyone was wondering), but a simplified form of his question / objection format might be useful here.

Question: Could the Resurrection be based on a Hallucination? We know sometimes people hallucinate things that can seem very real...

Such experiences are not uncommon among people who have suffered a traumatic loss or who are under extreme emotional stress or psychological stress. Were the disciples in extreme stress?

Surely.

Jesus, who they thought was the Son of God, the Messiah, the One Who was going to literally fix the broken world, just got arrested and executed. Very horribly, and very publicly. Of course they were freaked out!

Now can you have a group of people who thought they saw something they didn’t actually see? Sure. David Copperfield makes good money doing this 150 times a year.

Objection:
But there are two reasons I don’t find this compelling.  My first objection would be that the post Resurrections sightings were too spread out. This idea becomes much less believable if you have to say that Mary hallucinated, THEN Peter hallucinated, THEN the guys on the Road to Emmaus hallucinated, followed by 10 disciples in a room, THEN another hallucination by 7 disciples on the beach, THEN another hallucination of 500 people at once - all having similar, sometimes individual, sometimes shared hallucinations that all are consistent and pointing the same direction.

Luke 24:40-43

40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

My second objection is that hallucinations don’t eat fish As reality checks go, that’s pretty good. And it was really after the snack that they all relaxed and were able to accept this amazing event.

This may be an idea worth developing... Snack Theology anyone?

When I was a kid, I watched a cow jump up and finally get over, an eight foot fence. I could walk you through it, a highly amusing sequence of events.

But on the face of it, that is a ridiculous story. Cows don't jump well. They certainly don't make Olympic level leaps, and yet... and yet... it happened.

What would I give as evidence?

- There are still multiple people who are alive, who were there that day, who witnessed it
- It was a type of cow (a charolais) that is notorious for being weirdly athletic and panicky at a younger age
- We might look for pieces of the corral, with scratches and hoof marks on the top of one of the sections
- I saw it with my own eyes, and can answer detailed questions about the events of the day

When we talk about the idea of believing something like the Resurrection, we have to agree on what level of evidence is reasonable to justify such an incredible state of belief. While we might say some "sciency" things about the Passion, that isn't going to be our best approach. Like my flying cow story, I can't recreate the experiment or have it peer reviewed in a repetitive, replicated, lab controlled, duly recorded, falsifiable experiment. We have to turn to other means of investigation and deciding up or down.

As we go, it turns out that rules of evidence related to facts / criminal justice are a great path to consider. By that standard, we could verify the cow story in a way that would satisfy a jury and a court of law. And it may not surprise you to note, that a number of very bright scholars through history have become believers in this kind of investigation into the Resurrection. 

Over four blog posts, I'll try to briefly outline the strongest arguments against the Resurrection, and (also briefly) I will explain why there is a coherent and often compelling alternative.

First up is the Misidentification Theory: This one says that the people who claimed to have seen Jesus after his death could have mistaken someone else for him. This explanation is supported by the fact that the appearances of Jesus occurred in the early morning or at night, when visibility was poor. According to this theory, the individuals who encountered the person they believed to be Jesus were not intentionally deceiving others, but rather were mistaken in their identification. The events surrounding Jesus' death and burial were chaotic and traumatic, which may have led to confusion and mistaken identity.

The problem here is that there were numerous encounters, with hundreds of people and it becomes implausibly that they all made the same mistake. But let’s take a look at the encounter’s Jesus has after Easter:

Interactions Jesus had with people after the resurrection:

Mary Magdalene: John 20:11-18
Other women: Matthew 28:9-10

Interesting here is that in Roman society at this time in history, women did not have equal legal status under Roman law. So they couldn’t vote, or hold, public office, or testify in court. In every account, Jesus appears first to the women. Many historians are fascinated by this because it’s unusual in historical terms. The only reason to add this to the account was because it’s what actually happened.

Peter: Luke 24:34, 1 Corinthians 15:5
Two disciples on the road to Emmaus: Luke 24:13-32

Ten apostles (excluding Thomas): Luke 24:36-43, John 20:19-23
Eleven apostles (including Thomas): John 20:24-29

Seven apostles by the Sea of Galilee: John 21:1-25
Eleven apostles on a mountain in Galilee: Matthew 28:16-20

James (Jesus' brother): 1 Corinthians 15:7

Five hundred people at once: 1 Corinthians 15:6

Paul: Acts 9:1-9, 1 Corinthians 15:8-9, Galatians 1:11-17

It is hard to believe that people who lived with Jesus for years, his closest friends and family members, would buy into a doppelganger sighting that they agreed with unwavering force was the risen Christ. It was a single sighting in the fog, at night, that might have been... instead there is account, after account, after account. 

We see people talking with Him, walking with Him, eating with Him, touching Him, sometimes in extended periods of time with clear interaction and recognition. We see a lot of different occasions of very different people meeting Jesus, in a variety of context - and all of them coming to the same conclusion.

He is Christ, and He is risen.

For the complete message outlining this idea, check out:

Resurrection One

Sometime in my youth a preacher suggested personalizing Biblical promises and commands.  Thus:

“God so loved Greg that he gave his only begotten son…” and,
“Greg shalt have no other Gods before me….”
 
When I was older—like, ten minutes later—it occurred to me that personalizing the Bible could be abused.  I found 1 Samuel 15. I could personalize it! “Now, Greg, go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”

I did not know any Amalekites, but I had suspicions about a local bully.
 
I was reminded of Bible personalization when I was looking for birthday cards and found this one:

I used to have no trouble treating Philippians 1:6 as yet another promise to me, especially if I kept the whole sentence:

“He who began a good work in Greg will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.”
 
Hold up your hand if you feel this verse encourages you individually to trust that God is completing you, as a master carpenter would complete a construction project.
 
Stretch your hand even higher if this verse assures you that God’s work in you personally won’t stop until heaven.

OK, that’s fine. Individual growth does happen, thanks to God's work and Spirit evidenced in virtues such as I cited in recent posts. You know, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, smiting. But here’s my thesis:
 
Individual growth is not what this verse promises, at least not directly.
 
This verse invites me not to a solitary hike, not to pilgrim’s progress. It calls me to get on the bus.

Philippians 1:6 is about the church. It assures church perseverance!  The good work God has done among us, God will complete. Growth in number of members is not excluded, but saying Philippians 1:6 is about headcount overlooks qualitative good ways in which God works in a group, invisible and highly visible community virtues such as love, joy, peace, patience, generosity, wise counsel, and more. Can a community be peaceful and encouraging? Yes it can.
 
Of course, growth as a community comes from God working on individuals. Church growth tends both to benefit from individual spiritual growth and lead to individual personal growth. Yes indeedy. But just as it would have been inappropriate for me to go off on my own and smack Amalekites, Philippians 1:6 is not so much a personal promise as a corporate encouragement: Church, our God will complete his work among you. That God will bring peace and generosity to a community is exponentially more astonishing than the claim that God will bring peace and generosity to me. It must be something in the water, right? If in Moses' time one first-born died, that's the breaks.  If all the first-borns die... that's a scary miracle.  Similarly, sometimes a person matures. That's pleasantly remarkable. If a community matures... now that's a scary miracle. It was by such a corporate miracle that the early church grew.

There are two ways I aim to prove that, “He who began a good work in you,” refers to the church: by context and by grammar.

Read the opening of Philippians. Imagine that a messenger such as Timothy or Epaphroditus or a local leader such as Liddie or Jay Lorr is presenting this letter. Does the epistle to the Philippians ever address some individual? Or is this a letter to the group?

Philippians chapter 1 verses 1-7

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus,

To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons:
Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
I thank my God in all my remembrance of you,
always in every prayer of mine for you all making my prayer with joy,
because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now.
And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in  you  will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace…

You can easily scan through the four chapters of Philippians. Paul speaks collectively to "brothers", "brothers and sisters". "saints", "every saint". "children of God" and so on.

That was context. Now grammar.

A long time ago, a teacher asked me to name three pronouns.  I said, "What? Who? Me?"

As painful as English grammar can be, pretty much all other languages each have more complex grammars. The Greek language has two distinct word families that translate to the one English pronoun "you".

1. For one singular sensation, individual “you”, Greek has a whole word family pronounced sue.  This is the pronoun recorded in Matthew 16:18 when Jesus says, "You are Peter," Sue ei Petros.  Philippians has exactly one verse containing a singular sue:
 
   Philippians 4:3
       Yes, I ask you also, true companion,
       help these women,…

2. The other 36 occurrences of English "you" in Philippians come from the Greek word family pronounced who-mays. Grammatically, this references a collective such as an army or political party. John the Baptist uses this plural who-mays "you" twice when he trash-talks the Pharisees and Sadducees: "YOU bunch of snakes! Who warned YOU to run from the coming judgment?" 

Like apparently all languages except English, the Spanish language distinguishes between singular and plural "you". Below is what Wadmar tells me is the most-used Español Bible translation, highlighting the “you” words. 

• The quotes from Philippians 1 are plural "you". 
• The quote from Philippians 4:3 is the solitary singular "you" in Philippians.

Filipenses 1:6-7 Reina-Valera 1960 (plural “you” vosotros)
estando persuadido de esto, que el que comenzó en vosotros la buena obra, la perfeccionará hasta el día de Jesucristo; 
como me es justo sentir esto de todos vosotros, por cuanto os tengo en el corazón; y en mis prisiones, y en la defensa y confirmación del evangelio, todos vosotros sois participantes conmigo de la gracia.
 
Filipenses 4:3 Reina-Valera 1960 (singular “you” ti)
Asimismo te ruego también a ti, compañero fiel, que ayudes a estas…
 
For up-to-date Español contemporáneo everywhere outside Spain:
 
Filipenses 1:6-7 Reina Valera Contemporánea 2011  (plural “you” ustedes)
Estoy persuadido de que el que comenzó en ustedes la buena obra, la perfeccionará hasta el día de Jesucristo.
Es justo que yo sienta esto por todos ustedes, porque los llevo en el corazón. Tanto en mis prisiones como en la defensa y confirmación del evangelio, todos ustedes participan conmigo de la gracia.
 
Filipenses 4:3 Reina Valera Contemporánea 2011  (singular “you” ti)
También a ti, mi compañero fiel, te ruego que ayudes a éstas …

I suspect many English translations ignore the difference between singular "you" and plural "you" because:

(a) Tradition!
(b) Let context reign. Same-sentence singular context such as “you are Peter” and plural “you bunch of snakes” should be obvious. Larger scope such as the greetings in Philippians, Ephesians, etc., simply requires alertness from readers. Never mind birthday cards, one-verse devotions, and its-all-about-me.
(c) When your translation credo is word-for-word, then Greek "en" otherwise maps cleanly to English "in". That means we must add a word, changing "you" to "you all", or "all of you".
(d) We come to Christ as individuals. Whatever benefits the church tends to occur by individual growth or result in individual growth. Still, if we take Philippians 1:6 as about a work of God on our team and in our team, that makes a difference.

In any case, few English Bible translations clearly distinguish source plural “you” from singular “you”.

• The 1901 ASV and 1994 KJ21 follow the 1611 KJV in using "ye" for singular (Phil 4:3) and "you" for plural (Phil 1:6, etc.). The 1982 NKJV uses "you" for both singular and plural.
• The CSB and NET relegate plural “among you” to a footnote.* 
• The PNT uses inline brackets: “in [among] you....” 
• The NRSVA and VOICE use “among you”.

    * but who reads footnotes?

The prize for most nearly consistent word-by-word attention to Greek and Hebrew second person plural and some other nuances goes to https://yallversion.com. Singular "you" Sue remains "you" and plural "you" who-mays becomes “y'all”! I've found some omissions but not nearly as many as other English language translations.

Philippians chapter 1, Y'all Version:
 
¹ Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons: ² Grace and peace to y’all from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
 
³ I thank my God every time I remember y’all. ⁴ In every prayer for all y’all, I always pray with joy,  ⁵ because of y’all’s partnership in the gospel from the first day until now, ⁶ being confident of this very thing, that ʜᴇ who began a good work in y’all will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ. ⁷ It is right for me to think this way about all y’all, because I have y’all in my heart, since both in my chains and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, all y’all are partakers of grace with me. ⁸ For God is my witness, how I long for y’all in the affection of Christ Jesus.

Philippians chapter 4, Y'all Version:
¹ Therefore, my beloved siblings whom I long for, my joy and crown, y’all stand firm in the Lord in this way, my beloved.
² I urge Euodia, and I urge Syntyche, to think the same way in the Lord.
³ Yes, true partner, I ask you to help these women who have struggled together with me in the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.
⁴ Y’all rejoice in the Lord always! Again I will say, “Rejoice y’all!”

Footnote: Would you be surprised the Y'All Version comes from a Dallas Theological Seminary guy?

Reading a singular "you" when there's really a Greek plural "you" makes a big difference in Luke 17:21. The KJV and at least two dozen other versions have Jesus say,

   "For behold, the Kingdom of God is within you."

A couple more say, "the Kingdom of God is inside you."

However, the "you" in the Greek source is genitive plural: ὑμῶν, pronounced who-moan. Thus, I'm with two dozen or more English translations that render this verse,

   "The kingdom of God is among you", or "the kingdom of God is in your midst."

Hey, the context of Luke 17:21 has Jesus addressing multiple Pharisees. I don't think Jesus is claiming that the kingdom of God is within a "white-washed tomb."

The plural pronoun makes me side with the Y'All version. I find "Empire" a little strange, but can live with it.

 “ When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find  sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.”

 A.J. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner (1928) ch 6.

Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards was 19 in late 1722 when he began journaling for a year his personal to-do list. Entries include:

You can read all seventy of Edwards’ resolutions here. A modern language version is here.

I admire Edwards’ desire for excellence but question the mechanism. As a bear of very little brain, I’d probably miss the moment to act while pondering which of my seventy resolutions applied.

Jesus observed of the teachers of the law and the Pharisees, “they make strict rules and try to force people to obey them, but they are unwilling to help those who struggle under the weight of their rules.”

The Hebrew Bible offered 613 commands. King David highlighted eleven in Psalm 15. Isaiah 33 identifies six. Two virtues, wisdom and respect for the Almighty, drive the Proverbs.  Micah 6 spotlights three life practices: “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” Isaiah 56 identifies two life rules: “Preserve justice and do what is right.” Amos 5 compressed the Law into one aspiration given by God: “Seek Me and live!”

Meanwhile, over in Greece, the Stoics and later Plato and Aristotle identified four ethical elements: justice, wisdom, fortitude, and temperance. They considered justice as the virtue that best benefits society. To these Church authorities added faith, hope, and love, for a total of seven “cardinal virtues”.

Elsewhere in a world not-fictional-enough, what is best in life was debated:

Outside Christianity, one finds similar reductions of life principles. The five Confucian Ideals are: Rén (仁) compassion with generosity; Yì (義) honesty with lawfulness; Lǐ  (理) respect in relationships and worship; Zhì (智)  wisdom with knowledge; and Xìn (信) faithful integrity. More links: Buddhist ideals….  Islamic Character…. “The only Hindu value of note is ahimsa (non-violence) and all moral issues can be effectively explored though it.”

In stark contrast to the Barbarian, Greek, Roman, and other proposed virtues, you surely already know that Jesus and his followers repeatedly spotlight one virtue, unselfish love.

It's diabolically indicating that the English language and several other modern languages have lost a single noun and a single verb to name unselfish love. The Hebrew Bible uses אהבה  (love, pronounced ah-hah-vah) and חֶסֶד (loving-kindness, pronounced khes-ed).  The Greek Bible has ἀγάπη (pronounced ah-gah-pay).  Agape is “the greatest of these” (1 Corinthians 13). Unfortunately, in English the word “love” can apply to ice cream or to a romantic interest or patriotism; to a passing infatuation or to a lifetime of faithfulness. So Christians are apt to say “agape love” rather than the ambiguous “love”.

Jesus prioritized ἀγάπη: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

This can be stated less colorfully:

Love God with everything you have.

The giving of everything is demonstrated in the ensuing story of the Good Samaritan.

I am a bear with very little brain. My governance consists of two resolutions of two words each.

I start with a less ambiguous form of “love”: kindness. This carries a sense of gentle unselfishness; but fierce kindness exists too.  "Be kind" is too passive for my purposes. English lacks an unambiguous verb form of “kindness”, but that’s easy to fix: “Do kindness.”

As a farm boy, I tried to be kind to abandoned baby birds, forsaken bunnies, injured possums, and exploited turtles. I left many small corpses behind in the process. Thus experience tells me, kindness without discernment is not kindness. So, I add a rule 2. Here are my rules:

1. Do kindness.
2. Get discernment.

There remains the greatest treason, doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Still, discernment should confirm that the feeling of compassion is a logical precedent for sustaining kindness. Gratitude often precedes compassion. Both are more like gifts or traits sparked by observing someone else's kindness. So I take these two as my postulates, and enhance them with appropriate feelings.

In doing discernment I must reflexively, rationally, and most of all humbly recognize my continuing ignorance and need to learn. Per Socrates: “I do not think I know.” Or better, per Jeremiah:

This is the start of the book of First Samuel.

There was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim of the hill country of Ephraim whose name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. 2 He had two wives. The name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other, Peninnah. And Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.

3 Now this man used to go up year by year from his city to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of hosts at Shiloh, where the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were priests of the Lord. 4 On the day when Elkanah sacrificed, he would give portions to Peninnah his wife and to all her sons and daughters. 5 But to Hannah he gave a double portion, because he loved her, though the Lord had closed her womb. 6 And her rival used to provoke her grievously to irritate her, because the Lord had closed her womb. 7 So it went on year by year. As often as she went up to the house of the Lord, she used to provoke her. Therefore Hannah wept and would not eat. 8 And Elkanah, her husband, said to her, “Hannah, why do you weep? And why do you not eat? And why is your heart sad? Am I not more to you than ten sons?”

9 After they had eaten and drunk in Shiloh, Hannah rose. Now Eli the priest was sitting on the seat beside the doorpost of the temple of the Lord. 10 She was deeply distressed and prayed to the Lord and wept bitterly. 11 And she vowed a vow and said, “O Lord of hosts, if you will indeed look on the affliction of your servant and remember me and not forget your servant, but will give to your servant a son, then I will give him to the Lord all the days of his life, and no razor shall touch his head.”

12 As she continued praying before the Lord, Eli observed her mouth. 13 Hannah was speaking in her heart; only her lips moved, and her voice was not heard. Therefore Eli took her to be a drunken woman. 14 And Eli said to her, “How long will you go on being drunk? Put your wine away from you.” 15 But Hannah answered, “No, my lord, I am a woman troubled in spirit. I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink, but I have been pouring out my soul before the Lord. 16 Do not regard your servant as a worthless woman, for all along I have been speaking out of my great anxiety and vexation.” 17 Then Eli answered, “Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition that you have made to him.” 18 And she said, “Let your servant find favor in your eyes.” Then the woman went her way and ate, and her face was no longer sad.

19 They rose early in the morning and worshiped before the Lord; then they went back to their house at Ramah. And Elkanah knew Hannah his wife, and the Lord remembered her. 20 And in due time Hannah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Samuel, for she said, “I have asked for him from the Lord.”

21 The man Elkanah and all his house went up to offer to the Lord the yearly sacrifice and to pay his vow. 22 But Hannah did not go up, for she said to her husband, “As soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him, so that he may appear in the presence of the Lord and dwell there forever.” 23 Elkanah her husband said to her, “Do what seems best to you; wait until you have weaned him; only, may the Lord establish his word.” So the woman remained and nursed her son until she weaned him. 24 And when she had weaned him, she took him up with her, along with a three-year-old bull, an ephah of flour, and a skin of wine, and she brought him to the house of the Lord at Shiloh. And the child was young. 25 Then they slaughtered the bull, and they brought the child to Eli. 26 And she said, “Oh, my lord! As you live, my lord, I am the woman who was standing here in your presence, praying to the Lord. 27 For this child I prayed, and the Lord has granted me my petition that I made to him. 28 Therefore I have lent him to the Lord. As long as he lives, he is lent to the Lord.”

And he worshiped the Lord there.

__________________________________________

Ok, welcome to the inner working of my mind.

First, I’m reminded of the passage that says, don’t be drunk with wine, but be filled with the Spirit. Check. 

The disciples in Acts 2, were also perceived as hammered. Peter has to tell the crowd that no, not alcohol, but the burden and influence of the Holy Spirit was the cause of their clearly being under an Influence. In the same way Hannah in her “all in” prayer was more concerned with connection than with decorum. God give us all of us that heart to pray. Raw. Real. Passionate. Effective.

Second, the critical path of parenthood is temporary. If you don’t release your kids back to God at some point, that will be incredibly controlling and toxic. So on one hand, Hannah giving Samuel back to God seems extraordinary, and on the other, we should all follow in her footsteps.

Third, I’m fascinated by Hannah’s motive here. This was part honest desire, part ego, part cultural importance, part a seeking to get away from humiliation in a less than ideal family situation, and part God breathed burden / prophetic desire to press into calling.

Fourth, it’s cool how God uses prayer that seems local to become a means by which He draws us into a global Mosaic and His purpose in the earth.

Fifth, don’t miss, “the Lord of Hosts” here. This is the compound name, Jehovah-Saboath and appears in verses 3 and 11. It means the Lord of Armies, both heavenly and, in some sense, earthly and speaks to God as Powerful, Commanding and Sovereign. In Hannah’s prayer, she isn’t just praying to the intimate God of Covenant in His relationship with Israel. She is also making her personal appeal to the King, to the Commander in Chief, to the One Who is in Charge of Everything.


The character of Samuel is a towering figure in the story of the Hebrew Bible. He is at the nexus of so many high level historical and spiritual junctions.

He was the last Judge, and the first to hold the formal mantle of Prophet. He brought anointing to Kings, and spoke truth to power. He stood before a shepherd boy and spoke God’s word and calling over a young David. In, what was no doubt a surprise move to the charlatan medium, God even allowed him to speak His word from beyond the grave thundering judgment and ghostly visage. Hearing the voice of God as a child, he responded, being lent to the Lord for His purpose in an extraordinary generation.

Hannah’s prayer was heartfelt, as mentioned before, and I can’t help but wonder if she knew that something was afoot beyond her own personal stake in this. That if, on some level, she knew that this child of promise was going to be something of a World Historical Individual. That nations would change trajectory at his word… that this unborn child’s destiny was of such weight and purpose that Hannah couldn’t help but be a bit overwhelmed.

Prophet. Child. Judge. The one who calls the next generation into service.

Remind you of anyone?

Hannah’s prayer and beautiful outshining of a miraculous child point us directly to the advent of Christ. In the ashes of her sorrow, the Lord remembers her and brings forth a miracle of creation to bring God’s will to earth in His purpose and through the heartbeat of a divinely purposed baby. Like our Messiah, Samuel was a surprising outshining from the God of Angel Armies. He came, not as a warrior (though he wasn’t shy to use a sword when God directed him to)… but as a teacher, a prophet and connector of God’s word and will.

That the answer to Hannah’s prayer to Jehovah-Saboath came as a baby, is just beautiful, almost beyond description. That she had the heart and wisdom and selfless sensitivity to calling to give her child back to God is beyond extraordinary. That God’s general for the hour was a little boy who stood to say, “yes Lord” in the middle of the night is just fun and cool.

Here’s the question.

Can we pray in such a way as to be the vehicle of our own answered prayers? To carry the baby we ask for? Do we have the courage and commitment to truth in God our Father to give those dreams back to God? Do we have the will to surrender our own desires and major pieces of life back to heaven to use as He will? Can we call with all of our heart to the Lord of Hosts and celebrate the answer in the form of the vulnerability of the start of a new generation of leadership?

Can we pray like this hero of the faith?

In the DMM cycle (Disciple Making Movement) one of the key pieces of movement worldwide is an upgrade to extraordinary prayer.

If I’m honest at all, I'm just not there yet.

But I’ve been thinking about how to get there, both personally, and in terms of influencing the movement that we sense is coming. The questions I have currently are… how does this work practically? How can we support and create environments for prayer that are useful, conducive, and grounded in ways that will inspire God’s people?

This seems to me to be the kind of thing we can’t manufacture through cleverness or the ultimate marketing scheme. God will create the burden and urgency and direction of this kind of prayer.

It also seems to me to be the kind of thing we can have if we really want it. That we see the train, get on board, and soon enough we are on the bullet trip of a lifetime. 

So, how do we get started? 

I wish I had a recipe for this that was more clear. Lord, help my unbelief. Teach me to pray. Call us to where You want us to be. Spark this work in us.

As is often the case with me, I start at the beginning inside my head… and ask God to engage as Teacher.

Father, teach me how to pray - and how to catalyze prayer in others. 

Ok, cool. So here’s what I have so far.

1. Closet

I am a huge believer in free will. That may annoy my more hardcore reformed friends, but my best understanding is that while God is clearly sovereign, we are also clearly free. Insert <mystery> token here for the deep magic of paradoxical biblical truth.

Considering prayer, it is both a problem and an elegant solution, when paired with the idea of free will.

The problem is: why pray at all? Doesn’t God already know what we really need? Doesn’t He know what I will ask for even before I ask? Doesn’t He know that I’ll ask with bad motive, or in the wrong way, or get busy and forget to ask at all?

Yes. He knows all of that.

Yet with the idea of freedom in play, He also doesn’t seem to force His character or will on me. That isn’t to say that He doesn’t protect us, or work around us, or put His Hands on the scale to redeem us from our worst moments. I believe God is active, but all of the “around the edges” pieces of Jesus dealing with His disciples point to the idea of freedom and responsibility.  He is often frustrated with their lack of progress and faith, questioning honestly why they don’t see what He is seeing, or calling them from "earnest emotional response" to "in the moment" action.

​We too are disciples, and not so very different. We too are somehow able to grow in faith, with direct participation. This expectation points to freedom, and engagement on our part. 

We get to play. And practicing in good faith results in progress, while it remains an option for the Rich Young Ruler to walk away. When Jesus expresses a direct connection regarding the level of our faith, to what we believe and what we do... When He calls us out for a lack of faith, it assumes that we could have chosen (by some means) to do better. That "better" is available.

The solution is this: prayer is a principle means by which we align our will to God's.

If our spiritual maturing is a journey, AND if God is careful not to override our free will (even for our own good)… then can we give God permission to accelerate us in prayer? Can we take a leap of faith and go all in?

I think prayer is one way of giving God our full throated assent to move us (and in us), while maintaining the mystery of our freedom.

Clearly, God can do what He wants. And that will be just and good. But if one of the things He wants is for us to be free… then prayer becomes amazing.

It gives God our direct agreement, and freedom to mess with us, to correct us, to guide us, to empower us, and with prayer charged and running, just how much more effective can we be? Could prayer can help us learn the lesson the easy way, instead of the hard way? To actively participate in what God is doing, first and foremost in the trembling of our own salvation?

This is the kind of prayer that starts with gratitude, and the hallowing of His Name. With awe and correct perspective, (think Job at the end of the book) we can step into David's heart of 1) being laser focused on problem at hand, then 2) lifting his vision UP. To see God as best as we can see Him - and doesn’t that just change everything?

It is in the Closet that we re-align, that we say with Him, “not my will but Yours be done,” and we give God complete freedom to lead us wherever He wants us to go. In the Closet we set down our grocery list and align ourselves with Him and the glory of His will on the earth.

2. Corporate

We’ve been talking a lot about the pronouns in the Lord’s prayer. That, interestingly, they are all plural. Our Father… give us daily bread… lead us away from evil… That even in the Closet, we are still a part of the larger Body of Christ and even our solo prayer has a Corporate element.

Even more, when we get together physically, His word says that He is right there with us. There’s something deeply held in the community of believers, especially when we pray. Jesus leads His embryonic church to the Upper Room and they start to pray, together. In one accord, and in one place. This can’t be overstated. 

The power and connection we find in this mode is one of the most incredible gifts that He gives. It unites us, and our demographic, political, economic, and ethnic tribalism all melt in these moments. Who cares what (insert attribute here) you are in the presence of Almighty God? What difference doesn’t dim and fail to matter in the extraordinary unity of His Love and His Presence? These collective experiences, draw us, encourage us, inspire us, connect us, and lead us to what’s next.

There is no better inclusion than the singularity of mission shared by the redeemed. We are saved from, and to. What other details matter in the face of that glorious purpose?

God give us the vision to pray together, in the ways that are pleasing to You.

3. Canister

There is a wonderful story making the rounds about a canister found in the ruins of a Russian prison. We found, and pulled this version from Grok AI.

​_______________________________________

The Story: The Stones of Sukhanovka

In the dark years of Stalin’s reign, when the Soviet regime sought to erase the old Russia and its faith, countless churches were torn apart. Their golden domes were toppled, their icons burned, and their stones re-purposed for the machinery of the state. One such church, a small but cherished sanctuary near Vidnoye, just south of Moscow, met this fate in the late 1930s. Its walls, built of sturdy granite and limestone, were dismantled by order of the NKVD, the Soviet secret police. The stones weren’t discarded—they were too valuable for that. Instead, they were hauled to a nearby site, a former monastery called Ekaterinskaia Pustyn’, which the NKVD had transformed into Sukhanovka, a brutal special-regime prison for “enemies of the people.”

The prisoners at Sukhanovka—political dissidents, clergy, and others deemed dangerous—were forced into grueling labor. Among their tasks was to handle these very stones, once sacred, now reduced to raw material for prison walls and utilitarian structures. But not all the prisoners accepted this desecration quietly. A small group of believers, including a few Orthodox priests who had survived arrest, saw the stones differently. To them, these were not mere rocks but fragments of a holy past, stained with the prayers of generations. In secret, they whispered among themselves, making a pact born of faith and defiance.
One night, under the dim glow of a flickering lamp in their cramped cell, they acted. A monk named Father Alexei, whose hands still bore the calluses of swinging a censer rather than a pickaxe, scratched a message onto a scrap of paper torn from a smuggled Bible page. The note read: “These stones were once a house of God, torn apart by the hands of men. We pray that the Lord, in His mercy, will one day gather them again to sing His praise.” They sealed the note inside a rusted metal canister, perhaps an old tobacco tin scavenged from a guard’s refuse, and buried it among the stones they were stacking for a new prison barracks. As they worked, they prayed silently, entrusting their hope to God amid the despair of Sukhanovka, a place Alexander Solzhenitsyn would later call “the most terrible prison the MGB had.”

Years passed, and the Soviet Union crumbled. By 1992, the tides of history shifted. The Russian Orthodox Church, battered but enduring, began reclaiming what had been stolen. Sukhanovka, no longer a prison, was returned to its monastic roots. The barracks and walls, built with those pilfered stones, stood as grim reminders of the past. That year, as monks and volunteers began the slow work of restoring the site, they decided to erect a new church on the grounds—a symbol of resurrection over ruin.

During the construction, a laborer pried loose a stone from an old prison wall and heard a faint clatter. Beneath it lay the canister, dented and corroded but intact. Inside was Father Alexei’s note, its ink faded but legible. The discovery stunned the workers. The stones they were using, they realized, were the very ones taken from the church decades before—now being returned to their sacred purpose, just as the prisoners had prayed. Word spread, and the story took on a life of its own: a testament to faith’s quiet triumph over oppression. The new church, completed with those same stones, became a place of pilgrimage, its walls whispering a tale of divine providence fulfilled.

__________________________________


Thinking about the Canister, it seems to me that this kind of prayer is sublime and too often left for the moment of extremis, when it should be more intentional and purposive for us. This is a prayer for redemption in the face of injustice. A selfless prayer note, Canister filled time bomb for God to unleash His will and work in future context. A heavenly pay-it-forward blessing to the next generation.

In this case, it blesses the Christians who found the Canister, with it’s heartfelt prayer and prophetic purpose. It also blesses us, when we hear about it and are moved to know that God has a greater purpose than we see.

This is the prayer of Moses in the desert.

It is the prayer of Jeremiah in the burned stones of the ruined city.

It is Daniel, and later John, filling up Canisters with inspired scrolls, to us in hope, about chapters yet to come.

And it is the prayer of Jesus in the upper room. In John 17, our Savior was asking for an outpouring, and unity that He didn’t get to see, until He was on the other side of the Cross.

This isn’t denial or wishful thinking. It is not a stubborn refusing to acknowledge reality while hoping beyond hope that the heavenly pie in the sky is real in some metaphorical attempt to make ourselves feel better.

No.

This is the evidence of things unseen. The participation of God’s work in the earth, speaking in such a way as to draw our will into His, while trusting His timing, even when that outshining is not yet.

The question is this: what does God want in broken circumstances? What is His will that is beyond us or our ability to do it? What does He want for the next chapter, or perhaps even the next generation? What prayer should we pray, or what book should we write… to bless the ones to come?

Even in a state of hunger, sometimes we can selflessly meal prep in unbelievable ways. 

There is something deeply true and good about this idea of prayer. So set your heart… and prayer put a note into a Canister of faith.

4. Command

Sometimes prayer takes on something of an extraordinary voice.

Your sins are forgiven.

Hey you! Yes, you. Get up and walk.

God, I'm doing my utmost to obey your instructions. Please send fire from heaven... now.

Peace, be still (to the storms of nature itself).


Sometimes prayer is less like a feckless pleading, and more like Alexander deploying generals into the fray. 


Now, don’t misread my intent here. I’m not a name it claim it, blab it grab it, health, wealth, and ease, theologian.

But I do think that Father talks to us very directly in His word about a gospel divorced from heavenly power (and says with conviction to avoid this). If Jesus isn't just our Savior, but is also our Model for life and ministry, then this has some interesting possibilities attached. If, when He said, “even greater things will you do…” He wasn’t just speaking metaphorically, then we should ask what that looks like, and how to get there.

James tells us to call for elders, to pray over the sick, and then to pray in faith. There’s a longer story here (as James points us to Elijah as to how all of this works), but I think the short version is that this order matters. We pray “over” to align and ask what God is doing.

If through agreement and discernment, or through a supernatural outpouring of faith, we find that God is shining out in power, then we pray in faith, with boldness. That word for prayer in “prayer of faith” could be translated “vow.”

The vow of faith.

We see this when Jesus, or the prophets, or the disciples, or Paul, speak out in miraculous power - and then it happens - literally, physically, in the material world. The Red Sea parts, the child comes back to life, the blind eyes are opened and start to see. Obviously we can’t manufacture that, it is 100% dependent on the Holy Spirit and God moving. But God does lead us here sometimes, and miracles (both biblically and in the stories we hear today) come through His people and prayer.

This kind of prayer should be engaged in with care, and often with counsel. This isn’t witchcraft, or us "manifesting" what we want, but rather aligning our hearts and voices with the manifestation of God… to hear, then to bind on earth and trust in God to bind. Or release on earth, and with God, participate in that releasing in the mystery of His will.

Ask God what He wants to do here. Ask Him to build up your level of trust and faith to pray these kinds of “big prayers.” Then buckle your seat belt and get ready for the ride of your life.

Closet.

Corporate.

Canister.

Command.

​Let's go!