Joseph Girzone's A Portrait of Jesus Review

Joseph F. Girzone A Portrait of Jesus (Note: while I’ve read more of this book, for the sake of keeping this short, only 3 chapters have been chosen randomly for the review. For the sake of reading ease, I've chosen to use 'Jesus' throughout, though I generally prefer to use a variant of His Hebrew name.) Joseph Girzone is a retired Roman Catholic priest who has written several popular books. Reading the comments found on the back cover of A Portrait of Jesus, he is praised as someone who ‘draws on the wisdom of the centuries’, ‘writes with humanity and spirit’, ‘guides readers toward a more satisfying religious experience’ and who defines ‘just what intimacy with God actually looks like.’ Foreword: There is a real longing expressed here for ‘ecumenism’ or unity between different religious perspectives. There is an example described of this kind of hoped for unity between the authour’s Roman Catholic congregation and an Orthodox Jewish congregation. This is confusing because the belief system of the Roman Catholic church (who are seen by Orthodox Jews as idol worshippers) is completely against the belief system of the Orthodox Jewish religion. How can such complete opposites in belief have ‘unity’? He mentions that many pastors and priests were surprised to hear his talks about Jesus, that they had been taught theology and Scripture in Seminary, but not Jesus. He writes, “People have a hunger for Jesus and for a genuine understanding of what His Good News really is, whether they are Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, or even those who cannot identify with any faith. Jesus’ Good News responds to the deepest needs of the human soul, no matter what the person’s belief or lack of belief, and is intimately tied up with our understanding of who Jesus really is and how He thinks and feels.’ He doesn’t explain how a Hindu or a Buddhist or one with no faith can know their hunger is for Jesus. It seems to describe the belief that ‘all paths lead to God’, but that some of the people who are currently Hindus, Buddhist or atheists just don’t know that yet. There is an interesting comment that ‘We are in the process of reevaluating all our previously accepted values, the very pillars of our civilization.’ This is true, but bear in mind that it is the same message that Rick Warren presents. ‘Emergent church’ pastors such as Brian MacLaren have been saying for years that ‘everything must change.’ This statement sets the tone for the book, that it will present information which will challenge our previous assumptions of who Jesus is and what He came for. Bear in mind that Jesus is first of all obedient to God (even to what was a cursed and shameful death) and also that He fully upheld Scripture (the Old Testament) as accurately describing Who He is and what He came for. Anything anyone else says should challenge our unscriptural assumptions and point us clearly to the Bible as the written Word of the One who is the Word made flesh. Chapter 1: The people of Jesus day were definitely burdened with laws that regulated every detail of their life. Not only under Roman oppression, they had the good Law of God (read Psalm 119) twisted and distorted by the hundreds of added traditions of the elders, which had often over-ruled God’s simple commands. He writes that there are 613 commandments in Scripture and 365 prohibitions, but this is wrong. There are 613 laws, divided into 248 positive ones (you shall love the Lord your God) and 365 prohibitions (do not commit adultery). Of the 613, some are for men only, some for women only, some only at particular times of life (marriage, birth, death), and many for priests only. This is one of many instances where you should be able to expect, as someone who teaches and studies the Bible, that he be aware of what is and isn’t correct. Throughout the book, he often gets small details (and sometimes not so small) of the Bible just plain wrong. He is also inaccurate in implying that these 613 laws were the main cause of the people’s burden. The ‘law’ that he says Paul described as the ‘unbearable burden that no human being could carry’ was what was commonly called ‘the law of Moses’ and included the enormous burden of these man-made additions to God’s Law. This is important to note, because the claim follows that Jesus came to set people free from ‘the law’ implying that it was God’s Law that was the burden. Jesus did not come to set people ‘free’ from God’s Law. Also, at no time did He ever disobey any part of God’s Law. There is evidence that at times He ignored the added laws of the elders, especially where they conflicted with the original intent of God’s own instruction. If Jesus had disobeyed even the smallest of God’s laws, He would have been disqualified from being the sinless sacrifice for our own sins. Sin is defined as disobedience to God’s Law (1 John 3:4-5). There are a number of other odd claims in the book, that do not have any Scriptural backing, such as ‘Jesus…definition of a holy person (is) an individual who allowed all their God-given uniqueness to grow within to full maturity and in the process becoming a beautiful human being’ and, referring to Jesus, ‘He (did not) wear special clothes like the scribes and the Pharisees’ and the claim that while Mary was on time, Jesus was three days late to the wedding in Cana. That particular example has all kinds of other assumptions in the story! Very odd and more concerning, they are imaginative additions to the real facts we are given, and are used to paint a picture that we are then supposed to believe as truth. That is not a good basis for discovering Who Jesus actually is, as is the premise of the book. Chapter 6: This chapter opens with a favourable quote from Thomas Merton, the new age Catholic-Buddhist mystic. In it, he laments that he does not necessarily know if he is following God’s will. This chapter deals with what to do after first deciding to follow God. How does one know what to do? Joseph Girzone likens it to starting out ‘on an untraveled road in the dark.’ He describes how when he was a child, it seemed simple. He felt ‘deep down that it was really Jesus’ when he took the wafer and wine of the Eucharist, and went to Mass each day in order to be ‘close to Jesus in the Eucharist’. When troubles came, he crumbled, and ‘that beautiful sense of Jesus presence left me, never to come back’. He began to search the scriptures and the writings of the mystics as well as ‘the directories of spirituality for a way to holiness that made sense’. He could not figure out how God expected us to be perfect, yet ‘He made us all so flawed.’ Contrast that with Genesis 1:28-31, where God calls His creation ‘very good.’ There is discussion on ‘spiritual growth’ where he likens it to natural physical growth. Peter is described as spiritually immature because he could not ‘control his impulsive outbursts’. ‘Jesus…knew it (spiritual maturity) would happen in time, when he had grown to the point where it would happen naturally as an outflow of his inner spirituality.’ In contrast, the Bible describes Peter as changing completely and instantaneously when he was baptized by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. This was after he had been completely humbled by the realization of his three time rejection of Christ. There was no ‘spiritual growth’ but an enabling by the power of the Holy Spirit, in a repentant and humbled heart, to be completely changed. The fact is, we do not ‘grow spiritually’ as a result of OUR spirituality. We ‘grow’ as we yield to the truth of the Word, and live in humble obedience to it. God grows us, we don’t. We yield and obey, and receive what we are given. That is our part. Joseph Girzone carefully and accurately describes the need for humility before God, and the need to curb actions that are harmful to ourselves or others. Yet he goes on to claim that Jesus ‘did not spell out everything in detail’. That isn’t quite true, and demonstrates a legalistic mindset. The commandments God gave, that Christ expected us to follow, and taught simply and clearly (without all the extra baggage added on by the traditions of the elders) are not too hard to follow! Our problem is we want our own way; when we are enslaved by our sin nature, it naturally wants to rule in God’s place. We constantly, even without consciously realizing it, look for loopholes...if it isn't spelled out in detail, we find a way around it. We re-interpret and obey our version.

Only when we submit to dying to our sin nature (daily, see Luke 9:23) and are spiritually dead to sin and raised with Christ (Romans 6) are we given a new heart and are born again, this time to follow in obedience, no longer enslaved to sin. Time and again, Jesus taught that it was what came from the heart that mattered. And a heart that was enslaved to sin could never please God. Only a new heart and a new spirit could do that, and only He could give that. We have no need for legalistic 'details' to be 'spelled out' in the Law, our Father promises to guide us in how to please Him. The remainder of the chapter describes how we are to ‘fulfil our role in a mystical body…Each day we add our little colored fibers to the threads that are being woven into the tapestry of God’s plan, not just for our little parish, not even just for the Church at large, but for the perfecting of the human family.’ The descriptions paint a picture of humans bringing true peace to the world through their right spiritual growth. Yet Scripture paints a different picture. True peace will only come to the world when the Prince of Peace rules it.

Chapter 14: Peter is described as wanting ‘to construct a shrine to commemorate the event’ of the transfiguration (Matthew 17) yet Matthew 17, Mark 9 or Luke 9 do not say that at all. “Three tents” are not a shrine! The parable of the workers in the vineyard from Matthew 20 is explained as Jesus hinting ‘at things that will happen in His Kingdom after He leaves.’ Yet it is actually describing what will happen in His Kingdom after he returns! He claims that ‘In these examples…(Jesus) is also brutally realistic in warning His followers that the Kingdom of heaven on earth is a family of spiritually weak, crippled people who need redemption, so don’t expect it to be the perfect society.’ He goes on to describe the example in Matthew 13:47-50, saying ‘He compares the Kingdom of heaven to a fisherman who went out fishing. When he finished, he hauled the net ashore and began sorting the fish. Some were good, others stank to high heaven. So, also, the kingdom on earth, the Church.’ Yet this isn’t at all what this parable is speaking of. It is speaking of those who are God’s and those who are not. Matthew 13:49-50 actually reads that ‘the angels will separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. This is a very different picture than the book describes, and it is an important difference. In Matthew 7, Jesus warns that not all who call Him Lord are actually His. The warning is given that ‘His Kingdom on earth…will always be filled with sinners exhibiting all kinds of offensive behavior. Do not expect the kingdom to be filled with all nice people. It never will be, neither at the top or at the bottom or at any other level.’ This contrasts enormously with the example of the true believing community in Acts 2:37-47, and with the descriptions of the ones who will not be included in the kingdom that are given in 1 Corinthians 5:10-12, 6:9 and Ephesians 5:5. There is a quote which implies it is from Jesus (but has no reference) which says ‘If you want to have peace within yourself, and with your neighbors, learn to forgive.’ He claims that Jesus intends us to ‘try to understand the pain and tortured spirit that gave rise to such person’s offensive behavior. Then, when you see their pain, or their oddness, you pity them, and do not take on the anguish they are trying to pass on to you. It makes such good sense. It is not easy, and Jesus realized it is not easy, but it is the only way to preserve peace and serenity.’ This might sound good at first read, but it isn’t so. Yes, we are to forgive, as He has forgiven us. This is critical. But our forgiveness does not bring peace to the earth; neither did He come for that reason. Jesus Himself clearly said “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34) Conclusion: Much of his writing is quite beautiful and poetic, it sometimes takes effort to go beyond the illusion and carefully examine what is actually being said. Yet it is so important to do that, because though there is some truth here (as defined by the Word) much of what he says is not scripturally sound. There is glaring inconsistency and a great deal of inaccuracy, sometimes in details, but often in very important matters. This continues from beginning to end. Even in the last chapter, words are attributed to Jesus that are completely out of context, misapplied, or fabricated. In a book that claims to be a ‘Portrait of Jesus’ those details are critically important. A picture is given of Jesus that is inaccurate and manipulated.

Do you want to know Who He is? Then open the Bible, beginning at Genesis, and pray for the Holy Spirit to open your mind as the minds of the disciples were opened by Jesus (Luke 24:32) so they could understand the Scriptures written about Him. The Good News begins in creation. The Scriptures Jesus so often referred to are only what we today call the Old Testament. That section of the Bible is where you will find the Good News of Who He is. That is a much better thing to do than to spend the time reading A Portrait of Jesus.

Predestination or Free Will Part Two

The Calvinist doctrine of total depravity states that it is God who changes the hearts of some from rebellion to willing obedience, and that man has absolutely no part in this. One person is saved and another condemned not because of anything in them, but only at the will of God. It states that God completely and at His will accomplishes the salvation (justification) of certain sinners, as well as ensures their sanctification. 

The term ‘total’ in this context refers to sin affecting every part of a person, not necessarily that a person is as evil as possible. This definition has general support, even from those opposed to other points of this doctrine. While proof texts can be found in support of total depravity and predestination, there are other texts which refute this doctrine. 

There are two camps of interpretation, generally in total opposition to each other. Yet we know that Scripture, interpreted properly, can never contradict itself. The imbalances are in our own interpretations. 

Going back to the very beginning, we read in Genesis 1:28 that God blessed man and in Genesis 1:31, pronounced all creation, including mankind as the rulers of it, as not just good, but very good. There was no defect in all of creation. 

‘Very good’ means that at that point there was no ‘sin nature' in man (Genesis 2:25). This may be because man was created not being aware of evil (Genesis 3:22 and Romans 7:8-9). In perfect creation, mankind was allowed the choice of either obeying or disobeying God’s law. They were warned that disobedience would result in certain death (Genesis 2:17). Their eyes were not opened to evil (Genesis 3:5). 

God did not create humans with only the option of obeying; He allowed them choice, even knowing in advance how they would choose. He did not make them choose to disobey. Neither did He make them so they would naturally default to disobey. From the information clearly given, we see that He gave them free will to choose to obey or disobey, and that at the time they received that free will, they were without any defect. 

The parents of all humankind chose to disobey the law God gave them (Genesis 2:17) and act according to their own understanding (Genesis 3:6), bringing the curse of death (separation from Life) not only on them and the generations to come, but placing the creation over which they ruled in bondage as well (Romans 8:20-22). All the rest of humankind followed suit (Genesis 6:5).


In His mercy, God did not allow sin’s consequences to result in immediate death, though decay and the breakdown in relationship between God and man, and man and creation began immediately (Genesis 3:7, 17-20). God revealed His promise to them in Genesis 3:15 and until that time came to pass, protected them (Genesis 3:22-24) Though humankind retained the ability to choose either to resist the sin nature and walk with God (Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham) by far the great majority did not. In general, for humankind, every inclination and thought of their heart was evil, all the time (Genesis 6:5, 8:21). While this was the majority, it was clearly not everyone. 

If a man ‘walked with God’, trusting in Him and His ways and obeying His commands, God accepted his trust (and the resulting obedience), as righteousness. It seems implied in Scripture that even though such men as Enoch and Elijah were taken directly to heaven, this was based not on their attaining perfection before God in their own actions, but rather in their faith, perhaps taken together with the imputed righteousness of Messiah, to come to pass in its time. They were then justified before God through the future blood of Yeshua, and sanctified through their faith, which bore the 'fruit' of right responses in action. 

Genesis 6:9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God. 

Genesis 15:6 Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness.
Psalm 106:30-31 But Phinehas stood up and intervened, and the plague was checked. This was credited to him as righteousness for endless generations to come. 

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.
 
James 2:22-24 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God's friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
 
There is no Biblical evidence that God wills and causes people to obey Him. On the other hand, there is specific evidence that God hardened the hearts of men (Exodus 9:12; 10:1, 20 and more, Deuteronomy 2:30), leading to judgment. The stubbornness of Pharaoh and Sihon was clearly described as having come from a direct act of God, in order that His glory might be shown. 

John 12:40 describes God hardening the hearts of those who willfully and persistently commit evil, who have proven themselves unrepentant. In judgment, He hardens them so they are unable to ‘see’ and repent. See also Isaiah 6:10 and Matthew 13:14. In the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13) the tares never turn into wheat, they remain tares. 

No man can come to the Father unless the Father first draws him. Without that draw, we remain dead in our sins (Romans 4:17 and Ephesians 2:1). So it ALL, ALWAYS, begins with God. How can a dead man choose anything? 

But He draws us, through the spirit of Messiah (John 12:32), and once again gives us that choice that Adam and Eve were given. Will we obey Him or follow our own understanding? There is no Scripture evidence that God ever removed, or caused to be removed, that ability to obey that He originally put into humankind, once He first draws us. 

We can know that He does not draw only some and not others, for He clearly states it is not His will for ANY to perish (Ezekiel 18:23, 32, Ezekiel 33:11, 1 Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9) but instead to turn and repent, and live. It is implicitly understood (meaning there is no direct evidence to say otherwise) that man CAN (is able to) obey God and respond to His draw, but in the vast majority, he chooses not to. It is this response of obedience or rejection that man is ultimately judged for. 

While nothing on heaven or earth can separate us (against our will) or snatch us away from the love of Yeshua (John 10:28 and Romans 8:35-39), there is no evidence that we cannot walk away willingly, grieving the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 63:10) through our rebellion. 

Judas Iscariot came to Yeshua willingly and believed. Since we are given evidence that the other disciples were called, it is implicit that Judas was too. There is no evidence that Messiah ever separated Judas from Himself (John 6:39; 17:12-13; 18:9). Yet Judas was lost, and that was foreknown. We also see that Ananias and Sapphira disobeyed and received judgment immediately (Acts 5) also Demas walked away from trust in God, and his position as fellow worker with the apostle Paul, back to trust in worldly things (2 Timothy 4:9-11, see also Colossians 4:14 and Philemon 1:24). 

Paul told Timothy (2 Timothy 3:15-17) that everything he needed to know for salvation (being made right with God through God’s act) and sanctification (our response of a holy life) were to be found in the Torah. There was no ‘New Testament’ in their day; he was speaking of the Old Testament. It is also written in Psalm 102:18, Romans 4:23-24, Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:4-13 that the things in Scripture (Old Testament) were written for our benefit. 

Hebrews 11 speaks at length of God’s calling and what our response is to be, using many examples from Scripture. In the deliverance from Egypt, 600,000 men plus women, children and a mixed multitude (Exodus 12:37-38) were delivered from bondage into freedom. Yet ultimately only two (Joshua and Caleb) entered the Promised Land. 

From this account and many others similar to it, we understand that while many will be called (redeemed, freed from bondage), only a remnant will actually receive the promise, and this based on their response. This is a common theme in Scripture. 

We see the New Testament bearing witness to this with Yeshua's words in Matthew 7:13-14, that many (He spoke of the Israelites, the redeemed people) would be on the road to destruction, and few (the remnant), those who were on the hard road, would FIND the narrow gate that leads to life. The entire chapter of Matthew 7 speaks of our choice, and the results. We also read in Matthew 22:14 that many are called, but few are chosen. 

We also see the New Testament showing us that Messiah died for the sins of ALL men (Romans 5:12,18, Romans 8:32, 2 Corinthians 5:15, 1 Timothy 2:6, Hebrews 2:9, 1 John 2:2); that his blood is sufficient to cover the sins of anyone. John 12:32 promises that Messiah will draw ALL men to himself. But it is clear that not all will respond. Only those who were foreknown would respond. 

That foreknowledge does not mean that God makes us believe. It means He knows ahead of time who would respond (Romans 8:29). It is to those that the promise of life and the assurance of help are given. This is promised in Deuteronomy 7:9 and confirmed in the New Testament.
In the coronation of Solomon (1 Chronicles 28 specifically verse 9) we see God warning that IF Solomon does not respond rightly to God, THEN he will be ‘cast off forever’. 1 Kings 8:28-61 gives the request of Solomon to God on behalf of the people, with God answering in 2 Chronicles 7:12-16. Again we see an ‘if, then’ situation. The response of the people mattered to God. And it was His choice to make it so. 

Israel was not chosen by God on their own merit (Deuteronomy 7 especially 6-7), but they received the benefit of God’s promise to their forefather Abraham. God promises to bless a thousand generations of the one who obeys Him. 

It is God who initiates the process of our redemption by His drawing all men unto Himself through Messiah (John 6:44 and 12:32). Even the very faith that is needed to respond is available only as His gift (Romans 5:2, Ephesians 2:8-9). It is our right response to accept the gift, and submit to live in obedience to it. It is He alone Who is able to make us holy, as and if we are willing to respond to His Word in humility and obedience. We take Messiah’s yoke upon us (Mathew 11:28-30) and work together with him. 

The written Word, which is the message of the Word made flesh (John 1:14), is able to give us understanding (through the Spirit) about salvation and sanctification (2 Timothy 3:15) as we commit to read and obey it. The first of the commandments is to hear (listen to) and obey God (Deuteronomy 6:3-4) this is cited by Yeshua in Mark 12:29-30 as the most important command.
Just as God offers the gift of salvation through Messiah, He can also refuse to offer it. That is His right as Giver. He can harden the hearts of those who reject Him, or those He chooses. But evidence in Scripture tells us that is the exception, not the rule. In His grace, he is patient, not wanting anyone to come to destruction, but to repent and come to life (2 Peter 3:9). 

In conclusion, this free will of man needs to be understood in its boundaries. And it is very limited. It begins and ends with God; it is only available because of Him. There is nothing we can add to our salvation. Our ability to respond is given by God. Our only part is to accept this grace and to submit to live in it. The ability to become sanctified after being saved is also given by Him, as we submit to the work He does in us. We are to ‘work out our salvation with fear and trembling’ (Philippians 2:12) always remaining in His grace (Acts 11:23) and empowered by His Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:10-16).