Devotion.al

  • An Expert Problem

    Ecclesiastes 1:12–18, Ecclesiastes 12:12–14, John 7:37–49

    One of the biggest indicators of future success is a good education. Especially in this day and , education is not a luxury, nor is it just the trappings of the well-to-do. Education is a necessity.

    The “Teacher” of Ecclesiastes is often assumed to be Solomon, however, based on content within Ecclesiastes the “ of David” and “King of Israel” are more symbolic, rather than actual. Within wisdom teaching, this is not abnormal. It is quite possible that based on the experiences shared that the person was part of the upper echelon of society. It could also merely be a collection of ‘ observations and quips gathered into one work.

    Regardless, Ecclesiastes is a symbol of the desire to and understand. The burn in many people’s hearts to not just , but to also gain deep understanding continues to drive people to sciences, philosophy, and religion. However, what often also occurs with such a drive is a perception that human knowledge is the end. This is where the concluding words of the Teacher become so important.

    One can easily understand human arrogance in the realms of science and philosophy, but arrogance in knowledge of religion seems peculiar. The supposed subject of religion would generally be an entity beyond human comprehension. Even the later era Greek and Roman gods, while having human characteristics, had that beyond human nature. Yet, humanity still births and gestates this arrogance.

    This arrogance is on display as the Pharisees justify their unbelief with their “fact” that the rulers (depends on how one defines rulers) or Pharisees (at least publicly) didn’t believe or follow . They relied on the behaviors of others and their learning. There wasn’t a hint of, “maybe we’re wrong.” At that is the other piece of arrogance. It becomes a trap. Because of their arrogance, many people must follow their original line of thinking (for they were right), even when they learn something to the contrary. Of course, the greatest danger is when God brings the teaching, and the arrogant do not learn.

    1) Our world revolves around experts, from weather to to religion. Why do you think people always turn to experts? How is that good? How is that bad?

    2) Arrogance is often a tactic of self-defense. How so? How does it play into your ?

    3) Humility is the opposite of arrogance. How does that play into your life?

  • Everyday Morality

    2 Peter 3:8–15, 2 Corinthians 5:16–21

    Being human is not particularly easy. Our ability to think abstractly is a great . It is also a . With the ability to think abstractly, we also have gained a “higher” form of thinking…morality. From the Old Testament to Greek and Roman philosophers to the New Testament to today, morality is a reality. Many times political rhetoric is framed within a moral argument. Some times business and legal arguments are framed in moral terms. There appears to be an unconscious acknowledgment (for those who don’t consciously acknowledge it) that morals are a sure underpinning of existence.

    Peter is not addressing the philosophical end of things, but the day-to-day practical. Morality underlies your very existence. When Peter uses the imagery of the Day of God as a thief in the night, it isn’t that of a criminal, but that of one who will not be announced. If your morality is aligned with God, all is well. Granted, Peter didn’t we all lived Godly morality at all times, for if that were the case, he wouldn’t have provided such a warning. In the warning, there is still hope for all those who do not live out the perfectly (i.e., everyone), “…make every effort…” How is that hopeful? Simple. The effort is the evidence of a heart turned toward God.

    This would be in contrast to those who live one way on Sunday, and another way the other 6 days of the week (especially, the “work” week). A number of years ago, there was a huge energy company. The board of this energy company would vote to suspend its bylaws and/or code of ethics, vote for something that violated it, then vote to resume the code of ethics. They called themselves ethical. They never “violated” their code of ethics, because they were “suspended” during the unethical votes. That is a small (disgusting and sad) example of not making every effort.

    The underlying reality of morality also directly affects the calling on our lives to be ambassadors for Christ. “Be to God.” If our morality is suspect, then how could our reconciliation be trusted. One of the first things a negotiator (especially true with police negotiators) is to build rapport with the other person. Then, and only then, do they begin to build . If one’s morality is in question, trust is hard (if not impossible) to build. If we, as Ambassadors, are seen as immoral (or amoral), then why would they trust us when we the of the ?

    Make every effort to be reconciled to God, for then you are able to help others be reconciled to God.

    1) Morality and integrity are often used interchangeably. What is the difference? Why does it matter?

    2) Why is understanding the difference between human morality and God’s morality important? Why is understanding the difference between church morality and God’s morality important?

    3) When do you not make every effort to live life for God?

  • Too Direct?

    John 17:9–19

    prayed for the disciples, a lot. There is something quite interesting here. He didn’t pray for the world (that he died for). He prayed instead for his disciples. Why? Why his disciples?

    Jesus prayed for his disciples. Jesus prayed for his friends. Jesus prayed for their protection.

    He prayed for them…for us.

    Without the disciples, we would not know Jesus. Without Jesus’ protection, we would not have the disciples. Jesus did pray for the world…just indirectly.

    All too often, we want to see direct effects. We want to know that the of God is active in our lives. We want to know that God loves the world…and even us.

    Ultimately, with Jesus’ , the came to dwell in the 11 remaining disciples, along with all those who were with them in the upper room. From those 11, the church was born. The church despite its brokenness. The church despite all the hurt that its imperfect people caused and suffered.

    We sometimes if our prayers are effective. Perhaps it’s not our prayers that we should be thinking about, but the prayers of those who are praying for us.

    1) Have you ever had the experience of learning that someone was praying for you, and it came to be? What was your ?

    2) Have you ever prayed for someone else (especially not ), and watched it come true? What was your response?

    3) Prayer should be the most uniting thing we as a church do. How can you be more with your church in prayer?

  • Guarding Wrong Things

    Psalm 51:1–13, Luke 15:1–10, 1 Timothy 1:12–17

    “Be gracious to me…Against…you alone…have I sinned…Purify me…Turn your face…from my sins…create a clean for me…Do not banish me…sustain me…sinners will to you.”

    The (very) abbreviated Psalm 51:1–13 above probably resonates with you. The Psalms are often flowery poems, and when we strip much of that away it hits even deeper. As you read the full and abbreviated Psalm, did you feel gratitude toward God and his grace given to you? If not, I urge you to re-read both again.

    After almost 2 millennia of digging in and seeking God’s and wisdom, it has almost become the default setting that is God (though often still hard to fully grasp). Why is that important? Well, if Jesus is God, then Jesus would display God’s nature and character. That being the case, we ought to look at the Gospels as insights into God.

    In Luke 15:1–10, we often focus on the parables, which are great. Yet, the whole reason for the parables was to explain, “…[Jesus] welcomes sinners and eats with them.” God WELCOMES sinners and eats WITH them. Pardon the philosophical wanderings things brings to mind, but are we the church—the so-called of Jesus—doing that?
    Is the church so concerned about purity—and apparent —that it (they, we) doesn’t welcome sinners and eat with them? This is not a new struggle. In the early years of the church, there was a barrier to entry for the literal safety of the church. With Augustine’s official recognition of the church (and its sad becoming a place of worldly ), the barrier became toeing the party line (in both Western and Eastern ).

    Perhaps instead of looking at the last few decades as the way things ought to be, perhaps we ought to look to the founding of the Church of the Nazarene. Phineas Bresee—viewed by many as the primary (but not only) founder of the Church of the Nazarene—had his church in (what came to be called) Skid Row. The alcoholics, prostitutes, drug addicts (opium) were all there. They didn’t have it all . Do you?

    Yet the church puts litmus tests on a lot of things. It’s so much easier to say here is the line you must cross. Jesus died while we were yet (and to be) sinners. Jesus crossed the line! Jesus just crossed it the “wrong” direction. Thanks be to God!

    A parable: There was a company whose workers were on strike. The strikers’ singular complaint was that the company kept trying to bring in the “wrong” people. Those people were dirty, smelly, believed the wrong things. How DARE the company try to bring them in! They—the striking workers—were the ONLY ones who knew who belonged. A person trying to answer employment ad tried to get in, but the strikers wouldn’t allow it. The company president saw the person being spat on, yelled at, and even struck. The president then went to the person, crossing the picket line. The president grabbed the person’s hand and brought the person in. The person said to the president, “your workers are bad people! Look what they did!” The president responded, sadly, “You see, they think they are on the inside protecting the company, but really, by their actions, they are now on the outside.”

    1) Are we excluding the people that the is bringing to us? If so, how and why?
    2) What is the difference between purity and holiness?

    3) Which is more inviting? Telling a person how wrong they are, or telling a person how loved they are? And, then, how do you show either one?

  • Countercultural Love

    2 Samuel 1:17–27, Romans 12:9–21, Romans 13:1-10

    David had been pursued by the House of Saul for many years. Even after Saul acknowledged that David had been acting more than he, there wasn’t restoration. David was cut off from his friends (like Saul’s son, Jonathan), his first wife, his . He was in exile. David had been anointed to be king but was kept from the throne by an unrighteous man.

    In the political climate of today, we can easily imagine the celebrations of the other “side” (whichever one that is) celebrating the death of the king and his . In fact, it seems to have become a tradition for the last few presidents to have people asking and praying for their deaths. David was not like that with Saul.

    David could have been angry and arrogant. Instead, he mourned. He wrote a song to mourn the passing of the House of Saul. He insisted learn it and it. He was not happy that the throne was his. He was miserable for the loss of the leading family. In the current political climate, do you see that happening for any politician?

    When wrote to the Christians in Rome, we have to remember that they were lower than the Jews in Roman eyes. Paul still charged them to . Bless the persecutors? No eye for an eye? Be at peace? With them? Talk about countercultural!

    “Do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil with good.”
    —Romans 12:21

    While the Roman government was certainly no friend of Christians, Paul still told them to submit. While there is an ongoing distrust of government today (been there since the founding of the country), the odd thing is, in the US the citizens choose their leaders. We are still called to pray for them as much as we may not agree with their decisions.

    This also leads back to love. If we view people with whom we as anything other than people for whom Jesus Christ died, we have a problem. When we behave or believe that we cannot be wrong, we have removed God from the throne of our heart and put ourselves back on it. Back to the way our hearts were before we found in and through Jesus Christ.

    1) There is a strong human need for an enemy…an other. When have you been tempted (or succumbed) to treat another with whom you disagree as an enemy? What if they are family or framily?

    2) We are called to be of one mind with Christ. How does treating a as an enemy make a person of one mind with Christ?

    3) One of the greatest tools of the enemy is division. How can you oppose this tool with the heart of Jesus?

  • Denial and Grace

    Luke 23:50–24:12, John 19:38–42, Matthew 10:32–33

    Joseph of Arimathea is described differently by Luke and John. Luke describes him as good, righteous, and looking to the kingdom of God. John describes him as a secret of . On the surface, these appear to be different. And, depending on the audience, they can be very different indeed. However, Joseph’s attitude toward Jesus was fairly clear. Joseph greatly admired Jesus. He also did (to a point) follow Jesus as “the women” from Galilee were with him, indicating that he did have a place in the larger circle of disciples.

    Joseph of Arimathea was part of the Sanhedrin. The religious and civil ruling council of the Jews is the “body” that pushed for Jesus’ crucifixion. Earlier in the Gospels, it seemed that the Sanhedrin was unanimous in its thinking. Joseph of Arimathea shows that there wasn’t unanimity in Sanhedrin. Joseph was concerned, however, with his place in the Sanhedrin. John calls it out as fear of “the Jews”. Luke doesn’t specify that, but as Luke does only note that Joseph went to Pilate, Joseph definitely did it cautiously and did try to avoid making a scene.

    John even pulls Nicodemus into the . Nicodemus is first seen at night meeting Jesus (John 3:1–21). Next Nicodemus is seen defending (in a roundabout way) Jesus. Then we see him now bringing an amount of myrrh and aloe that was excessive (culturally). Nicodemus is still not declaring anything in the of Jesus, but his actions show a turned toward Jesus.

    The actions of both men could seem to be contrary to Jesus’ words in Matthew 10:32–33. In fact, many of us might well be guilty of this. It all depends on how one defines “deny”. It could be like Peter, who denied Jesus 3 times. That’s pretty blatant, yet God’s grace carried Peter forward to be the first leader of the . Peter, like Joseph and Nicodemus, was afraid.

    In the world, fear drives many of our actions. Around the world, Christians are hated and hunted. Muslims that have converted to Jesus (and often in mysterious ways) hide their conversion in fear, as they are (justifiably in many cases) afraid of being killed for the ‘s honor. In India, Hindu extremists target Christians regularly. There have been a number of bombings of churches recently. Are these Christians denying Christ by not proclaiming Jesus from the rooftops, street corners, family gatherings, their homes?

    Many preachers, who are in and are accustomed to religious and speech freedom, have said exactly that over the years.

    1) If you are not declaring Jesus to everyone you , especially to every family member who is not a Christian, why not? In light of Jesus words, then, what is failing to acknowledge Jesus?

    2) What is the difference, if any, between denying Jesus, and not acknowledging Jesus?

    3) When was the last time you acted like Peter, Joseph of Arimathea, or Nicodemus out of fear?

  • Grumbling and Arguing

    Philippians 2:12–18

    The Philippians may be slacking off in ‘s absence. At least that seems to be Paul’s concern. When Paul speaks about “working out” , a better way to phrase it may be, do the in all that you do. Don’t just there. He notes that God works through them, but that doesn’t spare them from doing something.

    Step 1 (left): Don’t grumble

    Step 2 (right): Don’t

    Step 1 (left): Don’t grumble

    Step 2 (right): Don’t argue

    How are you doing? We all need to grumble and argue less. That’s us “working out” our .

    It’s Paul’s small tucked in the midst of this which should provide some drive. “…You shine like stars in the world, by holding firm to the word of life…”

    We are all overwhelmed by the barrage of negativity. We are all overwhelmed by strident voices that are more about making a point, rather than a difference. When we look to the , we are called to make a difference, not a point. That’s really hard though.

    When talking about slacking off, it means that we are arguing and we are grumbling.

    1) When you have argued recently, was the Kingdom at the forefront of your mind, or was it you?

    2) When you last grumbled, how was the Kingdom affected?

    3) A star of the world, what effect do grumbling and arguing have on your ?

  • A Clean Tongue

    Colossians 3:1–11

    ‘s list of idolatrous tendencies to be put to seems pretty straightforward. Sexual immorality is (basically) sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman. Impurity continues the sexual theme, but it is less specific. Lust is lust. desire is not the actual sexual immoral act, but its very thought. If fact almost all of these are sex. Except for greed. It seems strange to throw greed (or covetousness) into this, but we can recognize that all of these are selfish things that hurt, oppress, or steal from others.

    It’s the next words that become interesting. Anger is more of the always angry person (i.e., temperament), rather than being angry (though do not in your anger, Ephesians 4:26–27). Wrath is more akin to jealous anger so as to diminish others. Malice is seeking to do harm (physically or verbally). Slander is speaking badly of others so as to diminish their reputation. Do not lie to one another. All of these seem pretty simple. It’s the one that was skipped that is very tricky as the culture changes around us.

    Filthy language. From a church , and even a few cultural decades, filthy language seemed pretty clear cut. However, as the culture changes, so too does our awareness of “filthy”. Obscene is still pretty straightforward. However, aischrologia (the Greek word used here) also means culturally inappropriate. And, this dear should cause us to pause.

    Regardless of how one feels about much of the discourse in general society, there are certain words that are not so culturally appropriate and even more when considering the context. In fact, there are many words and phrases that are no longer appropriate. The list is rather long, and it regularly changes. Instead of being offended by our words being taken as offensive, the better tactic is to work and not speaking in a way that offends.

    Now, this does not mean silence the . This does mean that your choice of words “tells” another person how much you value them. If you willingly speak words or phrases that are no longer culturally acceptable, then others will cease to value your words.

    This often becomes a cultural battle of they shouldn’t be “snowflakes” or “super-sensitive”. Yet, we are to answer for our witness. While many may agree or with your perspective of others, it’s Jesus’ perspective of them that should matter most.

    1. Can you think of a time recently where you thought of others less because they were hurt by a common word or phrase? What do Paul’s words tell you about that?
    2. There appears to be an increase of verbal sensitivity, on the one hand, yet an increase in uncivil discourse. How do you think Paul’s words and Jesus’ perspective should inform your to both?
    3. Regarding obscene/filthy language, much of the culture no longer finds it so. How do you think Paul’s words apply in that case?

Devotion.al

An Expert Problem

Ecclesiastes 1:12–18, Ecclesiastes 12:12–14, John 7:37–49

One of the biggest indicators of is a good education. Especially in this day and , education is not a luxury, nor is it just the trappings of the well-to-do. Education is a necessity.

The “Teacher” of Ecclesiastes is often assumed to be Solomon, however, based on content within Ecclesiastes the “son of David” and “King of Israel” are more symbolic, rather than actual. Within teaching, this is not abnormal. It is quite possible that based on the experiences shared that the person was part of the upper echelon of society. It could also merely be a collection of ‘ observations and quips gathered into one work.

Regardless, Ecclesiastes is a symbol of the desire to and understand. The burn in many people’s hearts to not just gain knowledge, but to also gain deep understanding continues to drive people to sciences, philosophy, and . However, what often also occurs with such a drive is a perception that human knowledge is the end. This is where the concluding words of the Teacher become so important.

One can easily understand human arrogance in the realms of science and philosophy, but arrogance in knowledge of religion seems peculiar. The supposed subject of religion would generally be an entity beyond human comprehension. Even the later era Greek and Roman gods, while having human characteristics, had that beyond human nature. Yet, humanity still births and gestates this arrogance.

This arrogance is on display as the Pharisees justify their unbelief with their “fact” that the rulers (depends on how one defines rulers) or Pharisees (at least publicly) didn’t believe or follow . They relied on the behaviors of others and their learning. There wasn’t a hint of, “maybe we’re wrong.” At that is the other piece of arrogance. It becomes a trap. Because of their arrogance, many people must follow their original line of thinking (for they were right), even when they learn something to the contrary. Of course, the greatest danger is when God brings the teaching, and the arrogant do not learn.

1) Our world revolves around experts, from weather to to religion. Why do you think people always turn to experts? How is that good? How is that bad?

2) Arrogance is often a tactic of self-defense. How so? How does it play into your life?

3) Humility is the opposite of arrogance. How does that play into your life?