Devotion.al

Tag: backward

  • You Want Me to do What?

    You Want Me to do What?

    1 Samuel 3:1–21; Acts 9:10–19a

    One of the biggest memes currently floating around is basically “forget 2020”. The gist of it is that it was such an upsetting year (politically, culturally, environmentally, health-wise, etc.) that we should just put it behind us. Is that, though, what we should do?

    Eli was not the head priest that he was called to be. Earlier in 1 Samuel 2, we read that his sons took their place as priests as a license to do as they wished. Their practices regarding the sacrifices and toward the women serving in the temple are noted. We can safely assume that if they were willing to do that, the undocumented part of the lives wasn’t any better.

    Eli’s admonishment of his sons was weak at best. He did not utilize his authority nor exercise his responsibility to “de-frock” (as we would it today). Eli wasn’t evaluated based upon his sons’ behavior, but based upon how he practiced his role as head priest. There is a strong inference to make that it was the combination of Eli’s lack of effective and his sons’ ongoing behavior that the family would be doomed going forward, as they were mentioned together (in 1 Samuel 2) in the resulting consequence.

    To be clear, the character of God, and the Scriptures bear out, that God would have restored Eli’s family had they repented (concluded with action, not just words). Instead, as Eli’s response to Samuel shows, they (as a family) took a fatalistic view. “The Lord wills it.”

    The between Eli and God (and probably Eli’s sons and God) seems less of a friend and more of a taskmaster. What is even more telling is something we read in 1 Samuel 1; Eli is more than will to correct the perceived behaviors of (Samuel’s mother). Eli’s sons, as priests, are left alone without consequences.

    Ananias also received bad news from God. He was to go to the man who lead the uprooting, exiling, and even killing of other followers of The Way (the of the sect prior to being called ). Ananias viewed it as a death sentence.

    Ananias’ response was quite different to Eli’s. Ananias was scared. While we could interpret it as a “fatalistic” (i.e., if I die, it’s God’s will), that does not really appear to be Ananias’ heart. Ananias was obedient and trusting that God had a plan. Ananias trusted that he would survive the “” encounter, for God did not send him to die (he believed). That’s not fatalism.

    Ananias chose to face reality. Ananias chose to walk ahead in , trust, and love. He made this decision while knowing the past.

    Looking back at 2020 and looking toward 2021, we can either be Eli or Ananias.

    ※Reflection※

    The “Joy of the Lord” is part of the mature Christian walk. How could those be expressed through Eli and Ananias?

    Why is “facing reality” as much a part of looking back and looking forward, as faith, hope, and love are?

    Facing reality often includes facing . What changes are you facing in 2021, and how will you live them out faithfully before God?

    ※Prayer※

    God, as we look to the , while not forgetting the past, help us to be faithful and trusting people. Deepen our understanding of what it means to live out your will in our lives. Amen.

  • Choose Your Answer?

    Judges 6:11–24, Psalm 27:7–14, Isaiah 6:8–10 (read online ⧉)

    Gideon had a . Likely many of the Israelites had the same prayer, “ us!” It was certainly a worthwhile prayer. We could say that Gideon was chosen. He was. We look to and we say, “Of course, Gideon was chosen.” Gideon certainly did not feel that way.

    In fact, his was, “It couldn’t be me!” Gideon was either confirming () that this really was from God, or Gideon was testing so that God would choose someone else. With God’s direction, Gideon was the answer to his own prayer. He had to face a well-trained and numerically superior force. That is the risk in prayer; having to be the answer to it.

    The “trick”, of course, is thinking that we must do it all on our own, without God. As Gideon lived it out, it was answering his own prayer by working with and on the behalf of God that things came to fruition.

    Isaiah, too, was an answer to prayer. The prayer, ultimately, was about the descendants of Israel needing a to call them back to with God. In his own vision, God asked (not of him) who would go. Isaiah volunteers. It just popped out. Whoops! Isaiah became the prophetic voice and suffered greatly because of it.

    The psalmist talks about his struggles, and how he wants to see God’s face. He seeks God’s aid and sustenance. It is in verse 11, that we really see what each of us should be asking in our prayers, especially our audacious ones…
    “…show me your way, LORD,
    and lead me on a level path…”
    …follow the way of the Lord. Neither Gideon’s or Isaiah’s path (of the Lord that they followed) was level on the surface. Spiritually it was. Our lives of pain, failure, , and even mediocrity, will not be “level.” When one fully rests, trusts, and follows God, the spiritual path will be level.

    1) When was the last time you made an audacious prayer request? What did you think of the answer?

    2) What is your limit to what God asks you to do? [and be honest…God already knows the answer.]

    3) What are thoughts about be the answer to your own prayers (at least some of them)?

    Action: Ask for God’s guidance for the path you are to walk.

  • Finding Faults

    Psalm 104, Ezekiel 18:1-32, John 9:1–11

    Original is the corruption of the God-given original nature of all the offspring of Adam. This corrupted base has an aversion to God, has no spiritual , and is inclined to . Until the fully cleanses us, original sin continues to exist even in the new life of the regenerate. Original sin differs from actual (i.e., personal) sin as it is an orientation to actual sin for which no one is accountable until they have reached a morally aware state.*

    This is an important concept to have in mind as we read this passage in Ezekiel. We can gather a couple of things here, (1) that people were blaming their parents (and ancestors) for their troubles, (2) that is was a corporate responsibility, not a personal one, and (3) that people were not taking responsibility for their actions. What is troubling is that this developed outside of the Law. Whether it was a cultural thing or something that developed over time is not all that clear, but what is clear is that there needed to be a significant spiritual shift among the exiles.

    And there was such a shift among many. They returned, confessed, repented, and mourned. Despite having the prophet’s words, Jesus is confronted by the exact same thought process. Now, we understand that the blind man was born blind. He was not responsible for his blindness. So, the default setting has become (again) the parents (or ancestors) fault.

    1) One of the common tendencies of people is to look for blame or fault. Why do you think that is? What does blame- or fault-finding result with?

    2) Authenticity is a big buzzword these days. When confessing sins or errors, though, do people really want to be authentic? What would it mean to you to have a safe place (and people) to ?

    3) How does always looking for fault work against us? What is the opposite of fault-finding?

    *Yes, that is a whole lot of theology (sorry), and if you want to see what the practiced theologians say, see Article 5 of the of the Nazarene’s Articles of . I I summarized it adequately.

  • Long Roads Together

    Genesis 22:1–18, Isaiah 45:11–17, Matthew 4:1–11

    Genesis has many passages in it that Christians, Jews, and non-believers over. Often it is our own pride, and sometimes it is us looking back upon those “backward and ignorant” people, with all our knowledge and obviously “better” culture. This passage in Genesis (22:1–18) is often one of the hard ones, as God calls upon Abraham to sacrifice his only of his wife Sarah. This appears problematic as God later condemns such human sacrifice. It is to result in the death penalty. Yet, God still calls for it. The easy answer is that God was “just” testing Abraham. God already knew that a ram would be provided. If so, to us it is a cruel test. To Abraham and the cultures around him, it was still cruel, but it was part of god worship (note, not God worship). We also have to understand that Isaac was the fulfillment of God’s to Abraham regarding descendants. God requested that Abraham kill the very legacy (so it seemed) that God had promised.

    The harder answer, but perhaps more answer is that Abraham was foreshadowing God the Father. God made a request of Abraham, the God the Father would completely fulfill generations later. God would sacrifice the Son for all of humanity. God’s only Son. The Son, part of the , would be born as man, so that mankind would become the legacy intended if sin had not come. As Isaiah speaks from God, righteousness stirred up. The city (a place of relationship with God) rebuilt. The exiles (those separated from God) set free, but not by money or exchange of goods. Then Isaiah says that Israel will be saved by God. The only true savior is God. With God being the savior, salvation is . God becomes incarnate. God is with us (Emmanuel).

    Even as God with us, walks our road. The temptations that Jesus faced in the desert are common to mankind (survival, security, pride/power). Since Jesus walked with us and Jesus is God, humanity and God became in a way that Abraham could never have imagined, and Isaiah couldn’t fully comprehend. Even we really cannot fully comprehend it, and we (through the church) have had a long time to figure it out.

    1) During his temptations, Jesus says, “Man must not live on bread alone but on every that comes from the mouth of God,” quoted Deuteronomy 8:3. If Jesus is the word (John 1:1–3), and Jesus is the bread, how does that cause you to rethink Jesus’ answer?

    2) God called on Abraham to sacrifice his legacy. How can God call on us to sacrifice our legacy for an even greater legacy?

    3) How can we discern when God is asking us to sacrifice our legacy, versus calling on us to sacrifice our pride?