Restedness does NOT mean no work

Preamble: this article first appeared as a comment intended as an edification for Sister Liz Mah, on her blog site: Liz’s Adventure. Sister Liz Mah is stricken with stage 4 lung cancer. Her blog chronicles her journey through this affliction. May I encourage you to pray and encourage this sister-in-Christ; you can pop over to her blog to know more about her condition and needs.

One of the seeming paradoxes in Bible included this (Matt 11:28-30):

28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

Say it like this:
Restedness that Jesus was talking about was NOT no work. Yoke is definitely referring to work. How can restedness in work possible? Under what circumstance is restedness possible in work? What is Jesus' yoke? Jesus' yoke is to do the Father's will. To exchange your yoke with the yoke of Jesus is to give up your yoke and take on the work of doing the Father's will. In other words, Jesus is promising that if we do the will of the Father, we can find rest for our soul. The opposite of restedness is turmoil, restlessness, strive, uneasiness, lack of peace, sense of burdensome, and heavy-laden. So, is it really if we do the will of the Father, we can find rest for our soul? But in practice, there are those of us, purportedly doing the will of the Father but there is no restedness of the soul; how come? The problem is that people take one part of verse 29 and NOT the other! They take Jesus' yoke alright, but they did NOT learn from Jesus. The verse said to take His yoke AND learn from Him.

Despite internet search showing up that there is a Torah prohibition of yoking a stronger animal with a weaker one, such practice is believed to be common in those times. I shan't comment on the Torah here, but I want to express that there is a good reason for that (practice), and Jesus was pointing to exactly that, here in verse 29.

Now there are those who wrote the yoke in a roundabout (opposite) manner, saying that we are the "strong" one that needs to be weakened, I believe that is incorrect, for it goes against the normal use of everyday examples as metaphors or parables of what God wants to say to us. No, it is we are the weak one, and Jesus is the strong one. A weak animal like an oxen is fitted with a strong one (and most likely an experienced one; one that had been doing the stuff before, and so know what is required, and how to pace things out), so that the weaker one learns the rope, so to speak, with the stronger one, carrying the greater load and strain until the weaker one is strong enough to bear more; “greater” (load) being relative to the newbie, but NOT to the seasoned one. People forget that when they do the will of the Father, they are to do them alongside Jesus, and learn from Him; they took the yoke upon themselves solely. And then they wonder why there is no restedness.

It is as time goes by, as you learn from Jesus through the Holy Spirit, whom you have to welcome beside you, the art of carrying the yoke, you grow stronger to bear the yoke, in restedness. It is NOT you get weaker and weaker that Jesus carries more and more for you; that goes against the grain of common use of parable and metaphor. The mention of gentleness and humbleness on Jesus' part was to assure us that Jesus is NOT going to lord over you, making you carry all the load, or that He is going to tell you, "I have been there, and done that, Now, you do all the work." I like to interpret verse 30 to mean this: Jesus was saying, “You don't have to worry about me, for whatever portion that I have to bear, it is "no sweat", easy and light!” Why? Because He has arrived (… and we have NOT). Jesus is your “big brother”, work with Him in the Father’s business, and He (Jesus) will take care of you, NOT just in the business of the Father.


Anthony Chia, high.expressions, Say It Like this

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}

Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.

Ye are being legalistic if ye say there should be no laws whatsoever

20Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 21"Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? 22These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. 23Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence. (Colossians 2:20-23)

Say it like this
Paul was trying to explain now that we have come into our salvation, we are no longer of the world, although we are still in the world; by this it is meant that we are no longer to follow rules of the world or men-made rules legalistically {legalism}. By saying of the “don’ts”, I believe Paul was trying to imply that we do not legalistically follow every rules, but to see if they are in line with the will of God, and if it will help us to comply with the will of God; in broad strokes, the will of God is that we are to love God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength; and we are to love our neighbors as ourselves. Of significance, was what Paul remarked as many of the world’s regulations or men-made rules do not effectively restrain sensual indulgence. The way to read this is firstly to understand that sensual indulgence is not something that would please God. The statement implicitly tells that one needs to restrain sensual indulgence, and not sensual indulgence is to be condoned. Secondly, it also implied that there are the “hows” to restrain sensual indulgence, but a mere rule per se may not necessarily help in the restraining.

One example to illustrate this is that for some countries, children pornography or child sex was banned, and the residents would not dare do these things because the penalties of law were very harsh, but they would commit these immoral acts overseas, in countries where there are no prohibitive laws. This clearly showed that such men-made laws have limitations.

However, Christ Jesus did not come to bring us into law-lessness. Laws, both Mosaic and secular, have their limitations, but they are not necessarily devoid of any good purposes. Furthermore there are still God’s commandments, and precepts and instructions which we have to obey, out of our love for God, and for our own good. The Old Covenant indeed has been superseded by the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, but commands of God, separately from the Old Covenant, must be adhered to, if they have not been specifically set aside by the works of Christ on the Cross. Paul was more specifically against HUMAN commands and teachings, NOT God’s commands, separate from the Old Covenant.


Anthony Chia, high.expressions, Say It Like This

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}

Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.