I think some discussion if that is okay. It seems the context of John 5:19, which we have used in terms of ministering to people is not really the context of the chapter. Also, John 5:19 sounds like a limitation and the healing of the man at the pool while others were in need of healing does not fit the rest of the scripture since other passages in the gospels stated Jesus healed those who had need of healing (Luke 9:11). Also, the manifestation of the Spirit, the setting seems to be descriptive rather than descriptive. Seems like Paul is describing the out-workings of God's power to people (some of them being former pagans) who had never seen this stuff (signs and wonders) before. But I love what you wrote. I quoted last Dr. James Dunn on his commentary on Acts, which stated, "Despite the association of bold speech and signs and wonders in the previous two verses, the almost invariable manifestation of the Spirit in Acts is inspired speech (2.4; 4.8; 6.10; 10.45–46; 13.2, 9; 18.25; 19.6; 20.23; 21.4, 11), whereas, somewhat surprisingly, the miracles of Acts are never attributed to the Spirit as such (though note 10.38)." My point is that I wonder if we overuse the idea and thought of being led by the Spirit. Or waiting for the leading of the Spirit. Of course, they are not bad things and they are and can be part of the process in terms of ministering to people. Yet, we do not always overtly see these things even in the Acts of the Apostles. We seem to have made gifts and John 5:19 and "leadings" perhaps much more than what what the person meant or intended?
Vincent, thank you for your comments. I agree that some discussion is excellent and welcome. I think I hear three separate but related issues from your comments. I’ll respond with my thinking on each of these, and you can clarify if I’ve misunderstood you.
1. In what way should we apply Jesus’ John 5:19 statement about His ministry to how we conduct our own?
2. Does John 5:19 describe a limitation for our expectations of what is available from God for people in need that we meet?
3. And related to question 2, do we overuse the idea of being led by the Spirit so that we spend time waiting for clear and specific leading when we should get on with it?
First, how do we apply Jesus’ self-descriptive statements in John 5:19 to ourselves as His disciples?
What I have written in chapter 12 is a corrective to my experience and observations over the years as we have trained people in spiritual gifts and ministry prayer. People can end up with the impression that when it comes to ministry, we are on our own, in the sense that, like Jesus, we need to listen for the Father’s leading to do or say things that bring the kingdom on earth as in heaven. So, Jesus showed us how it works, and we are now responsible for doing what Jesus did if we want to see it work, too.
The corrective I am proposing is to eliminate the idea that we are on our own simply trying to imitate what Jesus did. The point of looking at Luke 9 and 10 was to show that something else is going on other than simply learning the ropes from the master so we can do what He did. I’m convinced that the disciples operated in the power of God before Pentecost the same way they did after Pentecost - they heard Jesus’ directions that came with the Father’s authorization and power.
Ministry as a disciple of Jesus is never something we do outside of our relationship with Jesus (who indwells us now). Most of us wouldn’t say we operate independently of Jesus, but we may in practice. The analogy might be to “Christian Atheism,” where we say we believe in God but act like he doesn’t exist. In this book and this chapter, I address the need to rethink the dynamics of life and ministry with Jesus if he indeed lives within us, as the many NT references I quote show were assumed by the first disciples.
Second, does John 5:19 limit what we can expect God to do for people?
I have struggled with this same question over the years. I now believe this question comes from the misunderstanding I attempted to outline in my response to the first question.
Suppose the responsibility to “minister like Jesus” means to try to model my ministry after Jesus’ example. What accounts for those who don’t get healed (for example)? Is this a case of the Father not caring about these people, too? If I mistakenly believe all that is required is for me to do what Jesus did (hear from the Father and then do that), then either 1) He’s not saying much, or 2) I’m not very good at hearing Him.
Related to this is the idea that as an independent individual, spiritual gifts are augmentations for doing ministry the way Jesus did. I am responsible for hearing Him (if He is speaking) and then using what I have been given to obey and produce the desired effect (healing, deliverance, prophecy, etc.).
However, if, like the first disciples, I am in intimate relationship with Jesus, then ministry is always a case of me following Him and participating in what He is doing with the person or group in front of me - and what He is doing is what He sees the Father doing and hears the Father saying in that moment. When I give responsibility for delivering ministry to people back to Jesus, the problem of why some are healed (for example) and others are not, goes away. Jesus didn’t heal everyone He met during His earthly ministry. For example, Peter and John healed a lame man at the temple who certainly Jesus passed by at least once, but didn’t heal.
Third, do we overuse (or perhaps, misapply) John 5:19 so that we wait for leading beyond what is needed with the result that ministry we should be doing is neglected.
I think we err when we make John 5:19 into a kind of mechanical process when it is intended as an insight into an interdependent relationship. Our Western scientific/cultural assumptions lead us to assume that everything should be reducible to discernable causes and effects. So, if the needed ministry from God doesn’t happen (the effect), then there must not have been a sufficient cause (hearing what the Father is doing/saying). Likewise, for any spiritual ministry (effect) to have taken place, we should be able to discern and identify the necessary cause (the work of the spirit revealing what the Father was doing). I can understand the mechanical logic of that way of thinking. It is makes sense, but I don’t think it is true. The NT writers don’t seem to be trying to use that logic in their writings.
If you start thinking from a different place, that is, from a place of relationship with Jesus and partnership with Him as He continues to do what the Father is doing, then there is no need to pin down exactly how and when the spirit spoke or revealed the Father’s intentions. Rather, ministry is relational and mysterious as we follow Jesus through our day relying on Him to include us in whatever He wants, with whomever He wants, whenever He wants.
Jesus’ claim in John 5:19 is intended to show that He is subservient to the Father in all things as the Son of God. It is an insight into what was always going on underneath everything Jesus did, even when the NT writers didn’t specifically connect the activity of the spirit to specific ministry activities or outcomes (to Dunn’s point). Jesus was at times “moved by compassion” and that is all we are told, yet power was released and good works were done. This is why I’ve come to the simple place of daily praying, “May I walk with you today, Jesus? May I see what you are seeing, hear what you are hearing, and help you as you do what the Father is doing today? Amen.”
Well of some of things you addressed I get as a whole. I myself being part of the Vineyard for many years also going through VBI understand overall the premise of John 5:19, gifts, etc and not ministering alone. Yet, on some things: In scripture, I never see the early finding a need to explain or analyze why someone is not healed. Paul never analyzed or told Timothy why he was not healed of his stomach infirmities and he did not through up to the sovereignty of God cliche that is often mentioned. My point also being we do not always need to wait when going to people. The God who wants to bring a cup water, wants to bring freedom from oppression to that individual. No offense, we do not know if Jesus actually saw the same man that Peter and John did at the temple. But let's say, "He did." Do we know for sure that the Father did not want to heal that person? Does God not want people to hear gospel at times? Is He limiting that? I guess what I am saying is that I have often seen people who did not and would not minister people even Vineyard people and their first response was, "I can only do what I see the Father doing." That to me is putting a limitation on what we view God wants to do and taking that verse out of context. And believe, I was there at times and God did want to minister to such people and He did, but John 5:19 was not in view. I am not decreeing you are saying it is a limitation. However, if it is, then why does Jesus state in the same chapter, "For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will." This seems to indicate Jesus did not have a limitation of whom He can heal. Yet even if we continue with John 5:19, was Jesus strictly limited or was He telling us we can do only do what we see the Father doing? Yet John 5:17 says, "But Jesus answered them, “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” It seems God is always at work. Why would He stop? To me, I think some people have taken John 5:19 to another level. Whether healing, a prophetic word or giving a cup water (Matthew 25), do we need to wait? Jesus and the early church minister to people without their permission or their asking. To me, I peel back to Mark 1:15. The time is fulfilled (past tense) and the kingdom of God is at hand. The dominion and rule over sin, sickness, disease, darkness, and oppression are already in place. The powers are already broken. You "go" do it. I notice, while Jesus gave the disciples power when he sent them out, he never promised them success or results. And He never told them to figure out when or if somebody is not healed or free. Now add, Luke 9:49-50. The guy (we do not know who he was or even if he would be one of 72 in Luke 10)... to me was doing something he believed God wanted done. And he was casting out evil spirits. I guess he heard the kingdom of God is at hand. It is in place (inaugurated). While I understand there is a difference, I notice we never do this with the preaching of the Word. We understand it is something already endorsed by God and we do not wait to see if the Father wants us to preach it each Sunday service. Sorry, I am not trying to be snarky or anything... these are some of the things I think through. I guess perhaps what I am saying is as you stated, I wonder if we overuse things. Again, I have seen people not even wanting to speak to a waitress or share something with a waitress or give a cup of warm coffee (the coffee shop is right there) to the homeless, because they needed to see if this is what the Father is doing. They have to wait on the Lord to see how He is leading them. Again, I go back the kingdom praxis and theology (i.e. Mark 1:15, etc) since some steer this towards a ministry or someone's gifting. The John 5:19 and the gifts thing actually does create independence from one another. All the time, we here in churches throughout the U.S. God has given us gifts, go find and discover your gift (of course, some of it is good), but it gets taken out of context. Finally, I will repeat why do we have to account for people not healed. I do not see anything whereby in scripture they seek to account for people not being healed. We love and we go to them, because we love them. And to me there is another danger in that (analyzing when people do not get healed). I seen people doing this who then start giving an explanation about God and for God on His behalf to such people, which is predicating on God's character... something about Him that may not be true in the moment. And most of the time, it is just made up. Cliches... God is sovereign, etc. When is God not sovereign. But then some use John 5:19 as a fall back. Well, I can only do what the Father is doing. To me, that is using that verse out of context. Well, I rambled on too long Ron. You are great, I like talking about this stuff. I think balance and apologetic needs to coincide with things like this. Of course, I not referring to your book in that response. But you know what I mean... the subject as a whole.
I think some discussion if that is okay. It seems the context of John 5:19, which we have used in terms of ministering to people is not really the context of the chapter. Also, John 5:19 sounds like a limitation and the healing of the man at the pool while others were in need of healing does not fit the rest of the scripture since other passages in the gospels stated Jesus healed those who had need of healing (Luke 9:11). Also, the manifestation of the Spirit, the setting seems to be descriptive rather than descriptive. Seems like Paul is describing the out-workings of God's power to people (some of them being former pagans) who had never seen this stuff (signs and wonders) before. But I love what you wrote. I quoted last Dr. James Dunn on his commentary on Acts, which stated, "Despite the association of bold speech and signs and wonders in the previous two verses, the almost invariable manifestation of the Spirit in Acts is inspired speech (2.4; 4.8; 6.10; 10.45–46; 13.2, 9; 18.25; 19.6; 20.23; 21.4, 11), whereas, somewhat surprisingly, the miracles of Acts are never attributed to the Spirit as such (though note 10.38)." My point is that I wonder if we overuse the idea and thought of being led by the Spirit. Or waiting for the leading of the Spirit. Of course, they are not bad things and they are and can be part of the process in terms of ministering to people. Yet, we do not always overtly see these things even in the Acts of the Apostles. We seem to have made gifts and John 5:19 and "leadings" perhaps much more than what what the person meant or intended?
Vincent, thank you for your comments. I agree that some discussion is excellent and welcome. I think I hear three separate but related issues from your comments. I’ll respond with my thinking on each of these, and you can clarify if I’ve misunderstood you.
1. In what way should we apply Jesus’ John 5:19 statement about His ministry to how we conduct our own?
2. Does John 5:19 describe a limitation for our expectations of what is available from God for people in need that we meet?
3. And related to question 2, do we overuse the idea of being led by the Spirit so that we spend time waiting for clear and specific leading when we should get on with it?
First, how do we apply Jesus’ self-descriptive statements in John 5:19 to ourselves as His disciples?
What I have written in chapter 12 is a corrective to my experience and observations over the years as we have trained people in spiritual gifts and ministry prayer. People can end up with the impression that when it comes to ministry, we are on our own, in the sense that, like Jesus, we need to listen for the Father’s leading to do or say things that bring the kingdom on earth as in heaven. So, Jesus showed us how it works, and we are now responsible for doing what Jesus did if we want to see it work, too.
The corrective I am proposing is to eliminate the idea that we are on our own simply trying to imitate what Jesus did. The point of looking at Luke 9 and 10 was to show that something else is going on other than simply learning the ropes from the master so we can do what He did. I’m convinced that the disciples operated in the power of God before Pentecost the same way they did after Pentecost - they heard Jesus’ directions that came with the Father’s authorization and power.
Ministry as a disciple of Jesus is never something we do outside of our relationship with Jesus (who indwells us now). Most of us wouldn’t say we operate independently of Jesus, but we may in practice. The analogy might be to “Christian Atheism,” where we say we believe in God but act like he doesn’t exist. In this book and this chapter, I address the need to rethink the dynamics of life and ministry with Jesus if he indeed lives within us, as the many NT references I quote show were assumed by the first disciples.
Second, does John 5:19 limit what we can expect God to do for people?
I have struggled with this same question over the years. I now believe this question comes from the misunderstanding I attempted to outline in my response to the first question.
Suppose the responsibility to “minister like Jesus” means to try to model my ministry after Jesus’ example. What accounts for those who don’t get healed (for example)? Is this a case of the Father not caring about these people, too? If I mistakenly believe all that is required is for me to do what Jesus did (hear from the Father and then do that), then either 1) He’s not saying much, or 2) I’m not very good at hearing Him.
Related to this is the idea that as an independent individual, spiritual gifts are augmentations for doing ministry the way Jesus did. I am responsible for hearing Him (if He is speaking) and then using what I have been given to obey and produce the desired effect (healing, deliverance, prophecy, etc.).
However, if, like the first disciples, I am in intimate relationship with Jesus, then ministry is always a case of me following Him and participating in what He is doing with the person or group in front of me - and what He is doing is what He sees the Father doing and hears the Father saying in that moment. When I give responsibility for delivering ministry to people back to Jesus, the problem of why some are healed (for example) and others are not, goes away. Jesus didn’t heal everyone He met during His earthly ministry. For example, Peter and John healed a lame man at the temple who certainly Jesus passed by at least once, but didn’t heal.
Third, do we overuse (or perhaps, misapply) John 5:19 so that we wait for leading beyond what is needed with the result that ministry we should be doing is neglected.
I think we err when we make John 5:19 into a kind of mechanical process when it is intended as an insight into an interdependent relationship. Our Western scientific/cultural assumptions lead us to assume that everything should be reducible to discernable causes and effects. So, if the needed ministry from God doesn’t happen (the effect), then there must not have been a sufficient cause (hearing what the Father is doing/saying). Likewise, for any spiritual ministry (effect) to have taken place, we should be able to discern and identify the necessary cause (the work of the spirit revealing what the Father was doing). I can understand the mechanical logic of that way of thinking. It is makes sense, but I don’t think it is true. The NT writers don’t seem to be trying to use that logic in their writings.
If you start thinking from a different place, that is, from a place of relationship with Jesus and partnership with Him as He continues to do what the Father is doing, then there is no need to pin down exactly how and when the spirit spoke or revealed the Father’s intentions. Rather, ministry is relational and mysterious as we follow Jesus through our day relying on Him to include us in whatever He wants, with whomever He wants, whenever He wants.
Jesus’ claim in John 5:19 is intended to show that He is subservient to the Father in all things as the Son of God. It is an insight into what was always going on underneath everything Jesus did, even when the NT writers didn’t specifically connect the activity of the spirit to specific ministry activities or outcomes (to Dunn’s point). Jesus was at times “moved by compassion” and that is all we are told, yet power was released and good works were done. This is why I’ve come to the simple place of daily praying, “May I walk with you today, Jesus? May I see what you are seeing, hear what you are hearing, and help you as you do what the Father is doing today? Amen.”
Well of some of things you addressed I get as a whole. I myself being part of the Vineyard for many years also going through VBI understand overall the premise of John 5:19, gifts, etc and not ministering alone. Yet, on some things: In scripture, I never see the early finding a need to explain or analyze why someone is not healed. Paul never analyzed or told Timothy why he was not healed of his stomach infirmities and he did not through up to the sovereignty of God cliche that is often mentioned. My point also being we do not always need to wait when going to people. The God who wants to bring a cup water, wants to bring freedom from oppression to that individual. No offense, we do not know if Jesus actually saw the same man that Peter and John did at the temple. But let's say, "He did." Do we know for sure that the Father did not want to heal that person? Does God not want people to hear gospel at times? Is He limiting that? I guess what I am saying is that I have often seen people who did not and would not minister people even Vineyard people and their first response was, "I can only do what I see the Father doing." That to me is putting a limitation on what we view God wants to do and taking that verse out of context. And believe, I was there at times and God did want to minister to such people and He did, but John 5:19 was not in view. I am not decreeing you are saying it is a limitation. However, if it is, then why does Jesus state in the same chapter, "For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will." This seems to indicate Jesus did not have a limitation of whom He can heal. Yet even if we continue with John 5:19, was Jesus strictly limited or was He telling us we can do only do what we see the Father doing? Yet John 5:17 says, "But Jesus answered them, “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” It seems God is always at work. Why would He stop? To me, I think some people have taken John 5:19 to another level. Whether healing, a prophetic word or giving a cup water (Matthew 25), do we need to wait? Jesus and the early church minister to people without their permission or their asking. To me, I peel back to Mark 1:15. The time is fulfilled (past tense) and the kingdom of God is at hand. The dominion and rule over sin, sickness, disease, darkness, and oppression are already in place. The powers are already broken. You "go" do it. I notice, while Jesus gave the disciples power when he sent them out, he never promised them success or results. And He never told them to figure out when or if somebody is not healed or free. Now add, Luke 9:49-50. The guy (we do not know who he was or even if he would be one of 72 in Luke 10)... to me was doing something he believed God wanted done. And he was casting out evil spirits. I guess he heard the kingdom of God is at hand. It is in place (inaugurated). While I understand there is a difference, I notice we never do this with the preaching of the Word. We understand it is something already endorsed by God and we do not wait to see if the Father wants us to preach it each Sunday service. Sorry, I am not trying to be snarky or anything... these are some of the things I think through. I guess perhaps what I am saying is as you stated, I wonder if we overuse things. Again, I have seen people not even wanting to speak to a waitress or share something with a waitress or give a cup of warm coffee (the coffee shop is right there) to the homeless, because they needed to see if this is what the Father is doing. They have to wait on the Lord to see how He is leading them. Again, I go back the kingdom praxis and theology (i.e. Mark 1:15, etc) since some steer this towards a ministry or someone's gifting. The John 5:19 and the gifts thing actually does create independence from one another. All the time, we here in churches throughout the U.S. God has given us gifts, go find and discover your gift (of course, some of it is good), but it gets taken out of context. Finally, I will repeat why do we have to account for people not healed. I do not see anything whereby in scripture they seek to account for people not being healed. We love and we go to them, because we love them. And to me there is another danger in that (analyzing when people do not get healed). I seen people doing this who then start giving an explanation about God and for God on His behalf to such people, which is predicating on God's character... something about Him that may not be true in the moment. And most of the time, it is just made up. Cliches... God is sovereign, etc. When is God not sovereign. But then some use John 5:19 as a fall back. Well, I can only do what the Father is doing. To me, that is using that verse out of context. Well, I rambled on too long Ron. You are great, I like talking about this stuff. I think balance and apologetic needs to coincide with things like this. Of course, I not referring to your book in that response. But you know what I mean... the subject as a whole.