Tag: assume

Unplanned Joy

“The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a Son, and you will name him Jesus.”
—Luke 1:30-31 (NRSV)

I was thinking about Mary as I read this passage and her journey after she found out she was pregnant with Jesus. I was thinking of my own pregnancies. Each were different and none of them went exactly as I had planned. I had planned to be super healthy each one. But inevitably I had cravings. I had planned to not get sick each one (not that I am remotely in control of this). Each one I got sick and the last one was the worst! I had plans for how I would give birth. Not one of those went as planned as well and were all very different from each other. Adam, my husband, also had plans. He had planned to not get grossed out each time I got sick. He had planned to not break his wrist a week before we had our last baby.

I wonder if Mary’s pregnancy went as she had planned. Certainly it was not in her plans to have a baby out of wedlock. Certainly it was probably not in her plans to have her first baby be the Son of God who she would eventually watch be put to death for all human kind so that we might have life to the full. So I would imagine her pregnancy didn’t go as planned as well. I assume, also, that having this baby in a manger was not in Mary and Joseph’s plans.

I am a planner. I really am. And so when things don’t go as planned, it throws me off.

But. God had a plan for Mary. That’s why God sent the angel. To tell her of His plan. Thankfully she said yes! I am so sure that this plan gave Mary a lot of joy. Babies bring joy. Watching our children grow up gives us joy. Probably watching Jesus serve others, teach, and love gave her joy. Ultimately knowing that God had a plan through it all gives joy.

I am a planner. Lately it’s been really hard to do that. I know you all can relate. I basically didn’t use my fancy planner I bought at the end of 2019 for 2020 for 8 or 9 months. I didn’t like that.

But. I find a sense of peace, yes, but joy in the fact that God has a plan here. God didn’t will all of what was 2020 to happen. But God brings good out of bad and hardships. God has a plan here. In that we can find joy. In God you can have joy.

2020-12-12
Incomplete Armor

Psalm 27; Zechariah 10:12; Ephesians 6:10–18

This passage from Ephesians is one of those common favorites. Building and putting on the armor of God is still a popular activity for children. As a formation tool, it was and remains powerful.

From the point of the Ephesians, they were very familiar with the attire of the Roman soldiers. Ephesus was an important city in the region. The Roman soldiers would be stationed there. With its importance, many military excursions would start and end in Ephesus.

However, while Paul grasped a powerful visual (and, for modern children, a reinforcing activity), it wasn’t complete. As far as Paul was concerned, he delivered what he needed for conveying deep truths to the Ephesians.

Yet, there is still something missing. When I was younger, people often thought I was an “Army brat”. Even to this day, some assume I’m ex-military. Most of this is a childhood affection (with, yes, a lot of military tradition in the family). So, when I look at Paul’s list, I’m a bit bothered.

There are 2 significant pieces that are missing from Paul’s list: the javelin (or bow, depending on the unit) and the kilt. Also, certain Roman ensembles had shin guards, too (that makes 3).

What does that matter, you might ask? The javelin (again, or bow) was used for long-ranged attack; the javelin could also be used as a defensive tool against cavalry. We could use the long-range aspect as a “look ahead” and “be prepared” for what is coming. In other words, don’t just react to the world; be prepared to confront it.

Regarding defense, the javelin would need to be set against the ground to be effective. Again, be ready for what is coming toward you.

The kilt? Other than cultural Scottish attire, it protected the lower area of the body. It may not seem like a kilt could protect much, but much of the strength of the lower body is centered in that area. Wounds would deeply affect effectiveness. From a modesty sense, well, that’s probably obvious. That could represent purity.

Purity in this day and age is hard. Putting on the armor of purity may be more essential than we realize.

The shin guards are a little harder. They do keep you from getting kicked, and they would protect you from ramming your leg into a coffee table (you winced, didn’t you?). So, perhaps we could look at the shin guards at that which protects us (somewhat) from our own stumbling.

There is a fun addition to the helmet. Normally, the helmet was unadorned. However, during parades, the higher one’s rank the crest on the helmet would be brightly colored. Kind of similar to the flames of Pentecost, perhaps?

※Questions※

1) Which armor piece is most significant for you? Why?

2) If you were to choose aspects of the spiritual life that the 3 additional pieces would represent, what would they be? Why?

※Prayer※

God, thank you for the vision and wisdom of your servant Paul whose words, inspired by you, guide us today. Amen.

2020-10-28
Get To Your Seats

Luke 14:7–14

When I was young, my father insisted on making sure I was appropriately experienced in “high” culture. We went to ballet and opera. My dad said that we were sitting in the Grand Tier (still sounds a bit grandiose). This was the tier above the Opera (i.e.,floor) Seats, and below the Upper Tier, and certainly not the box seats. This would be so we had the best seats to see everything.

He was right. We were just high enough that barring a really tall conductor (I remember one), our view of the stage allowed to see everything from the top of the sets to the artists’ feed (really important for ballet, not so much for opera). Oddly, the Opera seats were more expensive, and the crane-your-neck-uncomfortably-for-hours box seats were even more so.

Which seats were the right seats? That depends on why you were there. For those in the box seats, sure there were those for the arts. There were those that were there to be seen. There were those who were there because it was expected of them.

Depending on the individual and event, what seat a person might choose to sit in changes. For some people, going to a party is a high-stress environment, and they’ll gravitate toward a “safe” person (if there is one) or a dark corner or wall to “hide”.

There’s also that person who will jump to the center of the room because they are the life of the party, or they will be.

When Jesus talks about the seating at the banquet, it about a lot of things. What we often don’t talk about in this parable is the parallel to Gentile life. This may have been less about the “honor” seating, but more about how the “pure” “religious” “sanctified” Jews were emulating the behavior of those they despised and feared.

This a jump for sure from the text to the context. However, when we see the behavior of the powerful or popular there is a strong tendency to emulate it. Romans were in charge. This is how the Romans behaved; therefore, it seems reasonable that the oppressed would copy it, not because they wanted to, but because it’s a natural response to avoid gaining the wrong attention of those in power.

If this is indeed the case (again, which is reasonable), then we have a possible case of syncretism, a combining of two different (often competing) worldviews and/or religions.

When a person was given the seat of honor due to their religious position in a non-religious setting or honor due to their secular position in a religious setting there is a mixing of two different worldviews that should be in tension with one another, and not in harmony.

※Questions※

1) Where do you see your political worldview and your religious worldview in harmony? Where do you see them in conflict?

2) Are you comfortable where your politics influence your religion? Does your religion affect your politics?

3) Do you evaluate people’s religious affections based upon their politics? Do you assume a person’s politics based upon their religion?

※Prayer※

Jesus, help us surrender our will to you, that you are the Lord of our religion and our politics. Amen.

2020-10-13
Protected

Protected

6 September 2020

Amos 7:10–17; Habakkuk 2:2–17

Critique and criticism sound very similar. They are often confused and misused. That they have the same root certainly doesn’t help. Critique and criticism, however, have different intents.

Critique is a thoughtful analysis of something with pointers provided for improvement. The pointers are intended to perfect one’s craft and are meant for self-improvement by the recipient.

Criticism is often less thoughtful and often a more emotional commentary of something. Unlike critique, the starting point is negative and is less about improving the other and more about lifting up the self.

The harsh words of the prophets were often viewed as criticism. Though there was anger and grief in the words (for God was angry and grieving), the intent was never the destruction of the Israelites or Jews. The intent was always to have them improve by throwing away their false worship and disregard of God.

The harshness came from the constant ignoring that occurred. The Israelites and Jews never seemed to be convinced by gentle and loving words. Before we criticize them, however, we need to critique ourselves.

One of the traits of humanity is the automatic assumption that critique is criticism. This is more a reflection of our own tendencies to criticize rather than critique. This is an important thing to recognize, for this also means we are often not open to improvement.

Our Christian walk is significantly impacted by this, as it means we are not open to even the Holy Spirit guiding us into all Truth, let alone feedback from our faith community. Our progressive sanctification (becoming more holy, or more like God) hinges on the surrendering of our will, and, perhaps more importantly, our ego and super-ego (to use Freud’s terms).

The human tendency is to protect our ego and super-ego. We don’t want to change. We want others to change, but not us. Any change we experience, we want to be without pain.

We all understand intellectually that this is unreasonable while we still seek to protect ourselves. In egotistical self-defense, we will assume that any critique is actually criticism and an attempt to harm us. We can look at social media, normal media, and see that exact behavior played out.

The Israelites were no different. They wanted to grab onto a dream the Jerusalem and the Promised Land were protected spaces and that they would come to no harm. They held onto this despite the surrounding threats.

By sending the prophets, he sought to help them see the error of their ways. Instead, they tell Amos to not prophesy against Israel. Habakkuk announced their egotistical ways and they opposed him.

※Prayer※

Lord Jesus, as we read about the lives of others in the Scriptures, help us to see our own failures in a brighter light than theirs, and guide us into the righteous life with you. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Think of the cultural issues currently surrounding us. Are we really all that different than the Israelites?

2) If the things around are being allowed by God, how should we be viewing them?

3) Thinking of critique and criticism, how can you improve your ability to receive and deliver critique, especially concerning spiritual matters?

2020-09-05
Clothed in Rags

Psalm 94; Luke 6:27–36; 1 Corinthians 4:9–13

Bless your enemies. Except “bless” means something more than just be nice or even help them. “Bless” means to ask for God’s divine favor to come on them.

We all want blessings, but we are being called to ask for God’s blessings for those who make our lives difficult, miserable, or (in some extreme cases) seek to kill us. This is a high bar of expectation. It’s a hard high bar of expectation.

In many respects, this may be the hardest teaching of Jesus. To assuage our own feelings of anger, betrayal, and trespass, we want vengeance! We want victory! We want justice!

“For [the Most High] is gracious to the ungrateful and evil.” (Luke 5:35)

“That is foolish,” proclaims the world. The world is right, from the world’s perspective. From God’s perspective, however, foolish is following the world.

Paul declared himself a disgraced spectacle that the world spat upon. Yet, Paul was determined to carry on. He chose a path to bless others and to be gracious to others.

This world could use a lot more of this, don’t you think?

However, the problem is that we want others to do it first. This isn’t the path that Jesus set out.

The world has taught us that a win-win scenario is false. Or to put it another way, that life is a zero-sum game. The world is correct. It is their math that this the problem.

The world’s math does not include God. The world’s math does not include Jesus (unless he can be used to make money). The world’s math is incapable of including the Holy Spirit.

So, why, as believers…as children of God…do we assume the world’s math is correct?

Yet, we do. We say #itrustGod and live as if the world’s math is correct.

What has also become increasingly clear is that the church has long been dressed-up in the world. Now the world is handing us filthy rags to wear, and we are offended. We took the nice clothes from the world already, if the world is done with us, why would they want to give us nice things?

So, what are we to do with the rags of the world? Realize they are the rags of a world that is passing away. We still have our “clothing of white”. Even in its “not yet” state (i.e., we don’t have it yet), it is still better than the finest clothes of the world.

※Prayer※

Father God, help us to look at the world as you do…a place that is passing away. Help us recall where we are called to live eternally and to look at the world through your eternal eyes. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What is something that you need to surrender to the world?

2) What is something that you need to surrender to God?

3) How are these two things the opposite side of the same coin?

2020-08-08
The Sent

Jeremiah 1:4–10; Matthew 9:35–10:1; Romans 15:14–19

When confronted by a calling on our lives, often anything but, “yes,” will cross our lips first. This doesn’t mean, “yes” doesn’t come later. If you’re reading this, in some way you’ve already said, “yes.”

The question then is, what’s next? That’s often an uncomfortable, life-changing, or even dangerous question to ask. Will you be told to cross the globe, or to go next door?

The revered prophet Jeremiah didn’t say “yes” to God, at first. We read the Scriptures and assume it was immediate, but it’s also quite possible that God took a few days. We don’t know.

We can see from others’ lives though that God works on hearts for days, months, and even years. God nudges, cajoles, encourages, sends others to talk sense into us.

God basically informs Jeremiah that his arguments are groundless. God had already set Jeremiah as a prophet. Jeremiah only had to be faithful. That is a big only, by the way.

Jeremiah believed he was unqualified for the duty. He was probably right, from a human perspective. God’s perspective was different.

In many respects, prophets were “sent ones”. They were sent to the people of Israel by God.

Shortly after the birth of the church, the 11 disciples (and later Paul) were called Apostles. Apostle just so happens to mean, “sent one”.

Jesus had the 11 for up to 3 years. They weren’t prepared for what it meant to follow Jesus (especially after the crucifixion). They certainly would have said, “Us lead a religious organization?”

We look at the Disciples/Apostles as uniquely called and qualified people. In many respects, they were. They had unique callings, for sure.

Yet, today the entire church is filled with apostles. We’re not talking the Apostles (as the specially defined ones), but apostles…the universally “sent” ones.

Some might use the word “missionaries.” The issue is that “missionaries” are often consciously and unconsciously presumed/assumed to be the apostles (sent ones) to other countries.

Most are not called to another country, and maybe not even another state. They are called and are being sent into coffee shops, restaurants, laundromats, and every other workplace.

The apostles—the sent ones—are you.

There continues to be a presumption that missionaries, pastors, and other “called” people are the ones to reach the world. Were that the case, then why did the Holy Spirit fall on more than just the 11 (original) + 1 (Matthias, added later)?

Pastors are called specifically to equip the apostles to reach the world. The church (as a whole) is having to rediscover that. We, as Christians, need to not just assent to it. We need to embrace it.

Paul encourages the Romans with the words that they are equipped! So are you!

Does that mean that the equipping stops? Of course not. There is just the reality that no one, not even pastors, will be perfectly equipped for every situation and person.

If you believe that you are unequipped, seek help! Yet, be aware that just because you believe that you are unequipped that God won’t still use you, or that (more importantly) it excuses you from your calling.

※Prayer※

Lord, may we acknowledge the call you have made upon our lives, and share the self-sacrificing love that you give. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What keeps you from sharing about Jesus?

2) Which is scarier, sharing the gospel with someone 15,000 miles away, or the unbeliever next door?

3) Why do you think the church, pastors, and everyone else often believe it is the “professional’s” responsibility to share about Jesus?

2020-07-09
A Different Kind of Backsliding

Acts 10:30–47; Acts 15:5–12; Galatians 2:11–16 (read online ⧉)

Peter was called/sent to the first “real” Gentile converts, post-Resurrection. There is some fuzziness in this as we cannot assume that there were no other Gentile converts. The likelihood was that they, prior to Cornelius, were converts to Judaism first.

This is an important distinction, as there seemed to be no question of Cornelius’ devotion to God. However, the language and framing of the story draw the conclusion that Cornelius had not done a full conversion to Judaism.

In the earlier part of the story, Peter invited the servants of Cornelius (likely Gentiles themselves) inside for lodging, and one would presume food. Already, Peter seemed to have a clue about his earlier vision about clean versus unclean (Acts 10:1–29). He dared (against more rigid Jewish protocol) to provide shelter and food for Gentiles.

Later, as the church spreads, the conflicts between Jewish expectations and Gentile realities start to affect the unity of the church in doctrine, rule, and expectation. So, they had a meeting. Who knows how long the meeting really was. It does feel like it was abbreviated in the Scriptures.

Peter stood up and familiarized or reminded people of his story. While we (rightfully) call Paul the Apostle to the Gentiles, Peter was the first. As the “rock” of the church, Peter had a first among equal standing. His words carried weight. James, too, as one of the original Apostles also had significant weight.

With this as the groundwork, it would seem completely obvious that everything was resolved, and that the Law was finally set aside as a guide and a history, and not the road of salvation.

Except…apparently that was only for a time. The list of people Paul accuses of backsliding is interesting: Peter (the “first” Apostle to the Gentiles), James (the Apostle that gave a further argument in defense of Gentile requirements), Barnabas (partner in Gentile travels with Paul). There were also others that had backslid into the Law.

This is not a minor issue, hence Paul’s concern, and his willingness to put ink to paper to exclaim it. Reverting to the practices of the Law denied Jesus’ grace. It also separated Jew from Gentile, which was, it seems, Paul’s biggest issue.

The bloodline that separated Jew from Gentile was erased by the blood of Jesus. This division was unreasonable and opposed the Gospel. Paul did not just let it stand.

The truth is that it is easy for any of us to fall into old habits and thought patterns, especially those that were experienced during childhood or under the influence of personally significant people. It is not unexpected that Peter would revert to those tendencies, nor the others. Paul didn’t seem particularly surprised, just upset.

Apparently, this was resolved, yet this kind of thing is forever a shadow in the church.

※ Prayer ※
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, constantly guide us in all Truth. Shape and form us to be better conformed to your will. Amen.

※ Questions ※
1) What is an old religious habit that you keep fighting? Is it a “rule” or a way of thinking?
2) What do you think the original intent of the “rule” or way of thinking was?
3) What does the cast of characters tell us about ourselves and the church? What does it show how we are to correct or admonish one another?

2020-05-13
Silence is Not Always Golden

Deuteronomy 5:1–31; Matthew 26:57–62; Acts 6:8–15 (read online ⧉)

Perjury is a crime. Knowingly providing false witness under oath is a criminal offense, as it should be. Knowing our system, however, perhaps the penalty is not severe enough. People speak “white lies” thinking they are doing the right thing (again, in a court case). People speak blatant falsehoods to change the results.

Depending on the falsehood can result in a guilty man being freed and an innocent man being sent to death. One of the other oldest legal codes—Hammurabi’s Code—sets the penalty for such perjury as death.

There is no question that bearing false witness was a sin according to God. Yet, in the 2 instances that we read today—Jesus and Stephen—that “minor” sin, that could easily be blotted out with a “minor” sacrifice, resulted in the death of innocent men.

Matthew and Luke (the author of Acts) make it a point to state that the witnesses are knowingly bearing false witness. Was this an incidental miscarriage of justice, or was this a systemic one? While we really can draw too firm a conclusion, this is an indication that justice and truth were often not met.

We often wonder why we have so many laws, and then we read stories like this (and these are not that unique in human history). There were the false witnesses. Those who either paid or otherwise recruited the false witnesses. There were those who were the “lawyers”. Then there were those who were the leaders of this travesty.

All were party to it. All had culpability in it. By the letter of “the Law”, only those who were “actual” witnesses would be “guilty”. This would also assume that those who knew they were guilty actually did something about it. Of course, they didn’t for they achieved their goals.

We all struggle with those who lie. It is that which empowers the lies that is the greater issue. With no culture of lying, lying becomes rare. A culture that disgraces the truth encourages lying. A power structure that encourages lying creates a culture that sends innocent people to death or punishment.

This is also a culture that ceases to honor God. Instead, it uses God to strengthen the perception of itself, so that no one will struggle or oppose it. God becomes a word—a tool—and the relationship that the word is supposed to represent dies.

Prayer

Holy Spirit, as we walk through this life, counsel our hearts and tongues to speak truth and to be truth-seekers. Guide our hearts and minds to bring the light of Jesus’ Truth into our lives and the lives of others. May all that we do bring honor and glory to you, oh, God. Amen.

Questions

1) Why is it important to talk about more than just the lier? How does its relative importance to the commandment of false witness mean for you?

2) What do you think other tribunals in front of these people were like for day-to-day things?

3) How can and will you encourage a culture of truth?

2020-05-07
Maundy Thursday

Note: If you are reading this as group, have different people read each passage. Even more difficult, do so around a small light, like a candle.

Exodus 12:1-14; Psalm 116:12-19; John 13:1-20; Luke 22:7-20; John 13:21-35 (read online ⧉)

Passover is a key, if not the key festival of Jewish life. It is expected that all observant Jews participate. Jesus was no exception. Some scholars have concluded that as a Rabbi, it was expected that Jesus would host a Passover for his disciples. By no means should we assume that this was the only Passover they celebrated together, but it certainly was the most important for us.

Jesus humiliated himself (by the world’s standards) by washing his disciples’ feet. The sacrament of Communion was established. The words Jesus used effectively wiping away the old covenant. The last piece of journey to the cross is completed by Judas Iscariot. Lastly, a new commandment is given.

By tradition, the “Maundy” of Maundy Thursday is derived from mandatum, Latin for command.

“…love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another.”
John 13:34

All of this done for love: God’s love for Israel, God’s love for the Gentiles, God’s love for Creation, God’s love for you.

1. Imagine that you know a meal is your last with your loved ones, but they don’t know it. How do you think you would feel? What would you want them to know?

2. Why do you feel Jesus called the bread his body, and the wine his blood?

3. Have you ever had your feet washed, or washed the feet of others as we read? If so, what was your perspective of that experience? If not, how do you think you would respond?

2020-04-09
Plan Pushing
Psalm 22:23-31; Genesis 16:1-6; Romans 4:1-12 (read online ⧉)

The story of Sarai and Hagar is strange. Did Abram not trust God to give him a son through Sarai? Or did they (Abram and Sarai) assume that as Sarai was not conceiving that this would be fulfilled through Hagar? It wasn’t, from their perspective, unreasonable. Yet, as we know by reading further along in Genesis, that this really wasn’t God’s intent for Abram and Sarai.

Abram and Sarai rushed God’s plan. That is not to say that Abram was not being faithful or not trusting God, but that his limited understanding caused him to follow a path that was not God’s intent. Paul suggests that the union of Abram and Haggar was an event of human works. It is only the union of Abram and Sarai that truly fulfills the promises of God to Abram.

Another way to say this is that God blessed Abram’s union with Hagar, because Abram was still in relationship with God. However, the fulfillment of God’s promise and blessing was fulfilled through Abram and Sarai.
1. Have you ever rushed God’s plan?
2. Has God ever honored a decision you made, despite it not being what God revealed to you? If so, once you got back on the path God laid out for you, what happened?
3. Why do we tend to trust that we “know” in the physical world (such as Abram and Hagar having a child), rather than trusting in God’s promises (such as Abram and Sarai having a child)?
2020-03-06