Tag: baptism

  • Not Yours, But God’s

    Not Yours, But God’s

    Psalm 69:1–5, 30–36; Genesis 17:1–13; Romans 4:1–12

    “Abram” translates to “exalted ancestor”. “Abraham” translates to “ancestor of a multitude”. While Ismael was Abraham’s son (the son he had with Sarah’s servant), it didn’t quite connect with Abraham as Ishmael wasn’t a result of him and Sarah (his wife and ).Both names had their own sting. “Exalted ancestor” requires more than just the son of a servant, but grandchildren. “Ancestor of a multitude” probably stung worse, for that would seem to imply even more. He had only one.

    Yet, as Scriptures attest to (and Paul recapitulates) Abraham trusted God, and Paul notes that God “attributed” to Abraham righteousness. The strong implication for many commentators was that God “considered” Abraham righteous because of his /trust, not because of his actions. In addition, many infer that it also means that God viewed Abraham as righteous in spite of any possible failings or sins that Abraham had.

    Circumcision was the that in some respects “remembered” the that God made with Abraham. One could view it as God choosing Abraham’s descendants, setting them aside, and treating them as righteous, even when they weren’t. The Israelites were set aside for God. The males bore the mark.

    The similarity between circumcision and are often drawn. Especially in the traditions that baptize infants, it is quite simple. Even in the traditions that perform believer’s baptism, the imputation of righteousness is still there.

    When we are baptized (as infant or believer), the righteousness we receive is that of Jesus. It isn’t ours. Just as in circumcision, or even infant baptism, the is performed before the child has a choice.

    The reality is that almost the entirety of our relationship with God…the entirety of our becoming more like God…is because of God.

    Paul draws baptism and circumcision together. Paul needed his Jewish brethren to understand that baptism was a valid entrance into the family of God. He also needed the Gentiles to understand that baptism was part of that went back in time, tying them to a tradition and people and God they were only beginning to understand.

    ※Reflection※

    • What traditions family, cultural, and/or religious tie you to the past? Why is being rooted in the past helpful when going forward?
    • The majority of traditions/theology (there are outliers) believe in only one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. Why do you think that is?

    ※Prayer※

    God, your goes to a past we do not fully know. Your word also goes forward to a time we cannot see. Thank you for the guidance that your word provides us, and may we share the gift of your word to others. Amen.

  • Remembrance of Change

    Remembrance of Change

    SermonTemplate400 words (3 minutes)Auto-publish to Faithlife SermonsAboutSeriesTopicsPassages

    Genesis 1:1–5; Acts 19:1–7; Mark 1:4–1

    Approximately 70% of the earth is covered by water. Around 3% of that is readily drinkable. On average, a is 60% water. Depending on weather and health, a human can survive 2–7 days without additional liquid.

    We all know water is important. Even those of us whose water only habits are lackluster understand that we need liquids to keep our bodies going. There are those that are so concerned about their water habits that they have apps that remind them to drink water.

    Other than a few desert cultures, people bathe using water.

    From an ancient perspective, water (deep waters, like oceans, especially) also represented . When we think about it (even today), the depths of the ocean have the air of death and often because we are unable to see below the surface.

    As a sign of repentance and/or the fulfillment of a vow or for other requirements of the purity laws, a bath (or mikveh) was (and still is) performed to fulfill ritual cleanliness.

    Part of the path of a Christian is being baptized. This is to show, in symphony with the mikveh cleanliness, that what was unclean (the old person, the person separated from God) is now clean and .

    Yet, the most mysterious is ‘. The Perfect One didn’t need cleansing. The Son of God didn’t need to be reconciled to the Father (God). The water of baptism brings change. Jesus didn’t change, though it could be argued that Jesus’ ministry truly did not begin until after he was baptized.

    The other change is a “handing-off”. John the Baptist could be (and probably should be) viewed as the last Old (or First) Testament prophet. This “old school” prophet “passes the torch” from the way of the Law to the revealed way, which is Jesus.

    ※Reflection※

    • It is not “evangelical” or “ of the Nazarene” to remember (i.e., observe the anniversary of) our baptisms. For such a significant event, why do you think that is?
    • Other than your own, what is the most significant baptism story that you remember? What made it powerful?
    • Why do you think it is important to and for “the church” (thus, all believers) to remember Jesus’ baptism?

    ※Prayer※

    Jesus, as your testimony of your , you were baptised by your own . May your humility guide us into your , and away from the truth of the world. Amen.

  • Good Gone Bad

    Good Gone Bad

    Mark 12:1–17; Matthew 10:5–7; Matthew 17:24–27

    Within the context of ‘ earthly ministry, the primacy of the remnants of the Israelites cannot be denied. Jesus calls them the “lost ”. Their place is significant to God, for they are even called by God’s (2 Chronicles 7:14).

    The tragedy of it all is that while they are still children of God, Jesus identifies them as strangers (or foreigners) to God. We might use the estranged.

    Gentiles were truly foreigners to God, insofar as God did not choose them to bear the name of God. Due to choices and behaviors, it came to the point that the Jews were such, too.

    What’s interesting is the Temple Tax. It was a tax from Exodus 30:11–16. Every man of the age of 20 or over was obliged to pay it annually. It was also called the “atonement” tax. It was used to take care of the tent of meeting (later the Temple). Its spiritual purpose was to remind the Israelites that their lives needed to be atoned for.

    What is also interesting is the backdoor way Jesus was asked…using Peter. There is also the that Jesus hadn’t paid it, or that they watched Jesus so closely that they knew he hadn’t yet paid it. Either presupposition leads to interesting conclusions. However, it is Jesus’ about strangers and sons that should catch our attention.

    Some commentators infer that Jesus paid the Temple Tax to fulfill all (tying language to the of Jesus). Jesus, however, doesn’t seem to have that same understanding. He sounds more condescending (“just to not offend”), though it is more likely a battle that is not fighting, and it’s a simple barrier.

    Jesus’ response might imply that the tax was out of date. In Exodus, the tax seems tied specifically to the Tent of Meeting. So, once the Tent of Meeting was done with (i.e., the Temple was built), the tax was done with.

    This reminds me of the Maple Street Bridge in Spokane, WA. When it was built, there was a toll booth. The promise was that the booth would be removed when the bridge was paid for. It was. In comparison, other public toll bridges that I’m familiar with still have tolls, and those tolls are tossed into the public fund, not the bridge operating fund.

    This is not to pick on them, but to show that we have similar examples in our lives. The tolls, no longer needed for their original purpose, are now moved to other “needs”. The same about the Temple Tax perhaps. The implication is pretty strong, though, as this ties into Jesus’ declaration about the Temple Courts being a den of robbers (Matthew 21:13).

    ※Prayer※

    Jesus, us of anything we hold onto as good that has become bad in our lives. Amen.

  • Salvation Balance

    Salvation Balance

    Matthew 16:13–17; Romans 10:6–14

    In the US, individuality is all the rage, and it has been since at least 4 July 1776. Individuality is not a bad thing, automatically. While there are many aspects to our that are indeed communal (and must remain that way), there are that are certainly .

    The most significant aspect is our salvation. US Evangelistic Christendom created almost a creed out it, “Do you know Christ as your personal savior?” It certainly isn’t a bad question.

    One of things it opposes, however, is a longer running of the with is infant and child . Infant and child baptism generally falls under the rubric of collective salvation. This is not to say it is invalid, quite the contrary. It is just a perspective that is different. Sadly, though, it was definitely a tactic use to divide certain traditions (Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist) from others (Baptist, Pentecostal, and non-denominational).

    However, once a person is able to right from wrong all traditions recognize that salvation has become individual. Whether by baptism or by confirmation, there is some recognition of the individual’s acceptance of Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

    There is a danger, though, in regard to individual salvation. The danger is a mental one. Many people can get to the point of intellectual assent. Others can get to the point of emotional assent.

    It is not to say that only having one means that you are not saved, for God works through all aspects of our personalities and can redeem them. It is to say that is only through both intellect and emotional that we “…may be able to comprehend with all the what is the length and width, height and depth of God’s love, and to know Christ’s love that surpasses knowledge…” (Ephesians 3:18–19, CSB)

    ※Questions※

    1) Is it easier for you to intellectually understand God, or emotionally? Why do you think that is? Where else in your life do you see that?

    2) Why do you think intellect and heart are needed in our with God?

    3) How might a person maintain balance between intellect and emotion? What practices do you have to do so?

    ※Prayer※

    Jesus, to know you is to know God. May the knowledge of hearts be equal to the knowledge of our minds when it comes to relationship with you. Amen.

  • Graveside Dancing

    Graveside Dancing

    Psalm 30; Hosea 13:4–14

    Yesterday was the birthday of my stepfather. He passed away years ago. For whatever reason, this year his birthday hit me kind of hard. He and I had our good moments. We had our bad moments. Just like any parent-child relationship. I was his only child.

    At his burial, the priest spoke about his baptism sealing him to Christ. This was spoken pastorally to people grieving. However, scripturally it has some weaknesses. His life, and to my knowledge, and beliefs were not of Jesus Christ.

    On his death bed, my wife shared the Good News of Jesus Christ. He was in a “non-responsive” state. Yet, she felt a response to the invitation to accept Jesus Christ as his Savior. Only in Heaven will I if the baptism was “sealing” as the priest said, or whether the physical response truly was an acceptance of Jesus. I can only hope and trust in God.

    Why the angst? “I cried to you for help, and you healed me.” In our and sorrow, God is there to “turn [our] lament in dancing”. in Christ in the midst of the pains of life is the life we are called to.

    In lament and pain, it is easy for our faith in God to be shaken, while at the same time relying more firmly on God will help us through the pain.

    There are many kinds of loss. The verses of Hosea summarize loss. The people lost (walked away from) God. They had experienced blessing, then they lost it. The vision of loss sounds brutal. Think of it though from God’s anguished heart.

    “…like a bear robbed of her cubs.” Have you seen a momma bear (or many mothers) separated from their children, with the feeling that the kids are threatened? I’ve seen a recorded version of one and lived the other. Don’t be the one that separates momma from the cubs. Just don’t.

    THAT’S GOD! Something is between momma (God) and the cubs (the children of God)! That is just not going to go well! It could be a that has the name Israel or Judah attached to it.

    THAT is the concept of ransom and redemption. Death and Sheol are not going to be forgiven for taking away the Children of God. The exact mechanism (despite a whole lot of theologians arguing over it for centuries) is unknown. All we know is that heart of God wants to turn our lament into dancing and our sorrow into joy.

    ※Questions※

    1) What’s do you think about dancing at the death of death?

    2) As Christians, why does death still frighten us? If we truly believe that a fellow Christian is in Heaven, why do we grieve?

    3) “Deathbed Conversions” will continue to decrease, as too many don’t know the basics of Jesus. How will you turn regular conversations into God conversations?

    ※Prayer※

    Father, thank you for redeeming us from death through the death and of your Son. May the guide our hearts to speak the words of Christ to the world. Amen.

  • Disciple, Baptize, Teach

    Disciple, Baptize, Teach

    Matthew 28:16–20; 1 Corinthians 1:14–25

    One of the measurements of a ‘s growth is the annual number of baptisms. If we were to review the church’s (and, by this, generally all American churches), the percentage is not particularly great. It certainly does not the so-called New Testament numbers.

    A lot has changed over the years. In certain traditions, infants are brought to be baptized into the of the church. While the Church of the Nazarene generally dedicates infants, functionally it often ends up being the same.

    Is a good measurement? Yes…and no. Baptism does not a make. It would be nice if it were that easy.

    There is probably a reason why the order is disciple, baptize, teach. The two primary modern pathways are baptize/teach and teach/baptize. Discipleship seems to not be part of the primary paths.

    Yes, the disciple is used a lot. The actually as a disciple seems to be lacking. But, you say, we have a discipleship class or book or…really, something that teaches.

    The evidence of a lack of discipleship is all around us. Look at our culture. Look at our news. Look at our sports.

    ‘s words somewhat feed into that. He states that he was not sent to baptize, but to preach. Now we often immediately equate preach to teach (not just because it rhymes). Paul seems to separate that.

    Especially in the apologetic intellectual Christianity of today, preaching is often used as teaching. Paul calls his preaching foolishness. Paul’s foolishness wouldn’t seem to be the same as today’s preaching.

    It might even mean that the wise, the teacher of the law, the debater of the might very well be the church and its practices. This is not to tear down the church, but to examine it. This is meant to examine us.

    , you commanded your disciples to make disciples. Help us to do our part. Amen.

    1) What is discipleship? What does a disciple look like?

    2) What is the difference between being a disciple and being taught?

    3) Do you think Jesus meant the three (disciple, baptize, teach) in a particular order or to actually separate them? Or do you think Jesus had something else in mind? If so, what?

  • Seashell Summer

    Seashell Summer

    Matthew 3:1–13; Mark 10:35–40; John 13:1–11; 1 Peter 3:18–22 (read online ⧉)

    What is one thing you think of when it comes to Summer? How about a Summer trip or vacation? Today is the first day of Summer. Today is also National Seashell Day, in honor of trips to the ocean being the summer trip that many people take.

    For those of us more familiar with coastal life, the sea may not represent the most interesting thing. For many, it is a place of recovery and . For others, it is a place of power and majesty (there really is nothing like a on the Pacific coast). For others still, it is a place of family and fun. Then for others, it represents the most dreaded time of all, concentrated time with family.

    The seashell actually has a place in the world, too. If you are familiar with Lutheran, Episcopal/Anglican, and Roman Catholic baptism traditions, it is not uncommon for the priest to pour water over an infant 3 times using a seashell invoking, “In the name of the (pour 1), and in the Son (pour 2), and in the Holy (pour 3).”

    Where and how the seashell (in particular the Scallop seashell) was tied to baptism is tied to 2 men. The first would be St James the Greater who supposedly used the seashell to beg for alms on his pilgrimage, allowing even the poorest person to feel generous and able to give. How this exactly would have gotten tied to baptism is a mystery, so is unlikely.

    The other likely avenue is St. Augustine, who had a vision of a boy trying to empty the sea with a seashell. After suggesting the boy why of this pointless activity, the boy retorted why are you trying to comprehend the entirety of the mystery of the Trinity. This as some greater weight, tying in water, pouring of water, and the Trinity. Still, someone would have had to make a huge leap.

    There is another theory that John the Baptist used such to “aid” in baptism. However, one of our Jewish friends made a valid point that John would not have used an “unclean” (or non-Kosher) item to do such. Of the 3, the tie to Augustine makes the most sense.

    However, there appear to be mosaics and frescos that predate Augustine that still have the seashell. Take your favorite theory and it’s fine. Just note that using a seashell for baptism is not mentioned in the Bible, so it is neither necessary nor forbidden.

    The methods of performing baptism (immersion once, immersion thrice, pouring, drawing the cross, infant, child, confessing, adult) have long been an issue in the church. It is one well wrestling over for it is a command of Jesus. Yet, seashells are a weird non-sequitur, and there may be others you can think of. Such traditions and symbols can be valuable, but only if used and explained.

    While denominations have been formed over methods and timing of baptism, none of them deny the significance of baptism. Wesleyans (such as the Church of the Nazarene, of which Generations is a part) believe that baptism is an outward (public profession) of inner . Other traditions hold that baptism is the act by which a person (particularly a child) is irrevocably sealed to the family of God. There are myriads of understandings.

    What isn’t up for debate is whether one should be baptized. The symbolism of and resurrection. The public profession of faith. The commandment of Jesus. All are part of the Christian journey and life.

    One thing to leave you with. The tradition (inherited from the Jews) is baptism in “” water. If you do make a trip to the sea or rivers, take some time with God and remember your baptism.

  • 3 is 1 and 1 is 3

    3 is 1 and 1 is 3

    Deuteronomy 6:4–5; Matthew 3:13–17; Matthew 28:16–20; 1 Peter 1:1–2 (read online ⧉)

    This is one of those odd “Liturgical” Sundays in the Christian year. It to specifically observe the creedal declaration of and faith in the . We have Sundays set aside for Advent, Lent, Christmas, Easter, Pentecost. These are event-based. It’s not that they don’t have doctrinal pieces in them; their beginning is based upon an event.

    There is an additional oddity, especially for people who call the Bible the Word of God…Trinity appears nowhere, at least not as an explicit term. That’s also what makes this Sunday interesting. A foundational theological basis for orthodox Christianity is not found explicitly in the Bible, yet is one of the key doctrines upon which orthodoxy is defined (i.e., Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses being non-Trinitarian believers).

    One of the biggest things that the Trinity teaches us by its very example is that not everything can be explained by science or even a sound rationalization of the faith. The Trinity can only be believed (ultimately) by faith. The concept that God (the Father) is God, Jesus is God, the Spirit is God, while, God (the Father) is neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit, Jesus is neither the Holy Spirit nor God (the Father), and the Holy Spirit is not God (the Father) nor Jesus (An aside: even writing that sentence, which is a simplified excerpt of the Athanasian Creed, hurt my head a bit).

    The beauty of the Trinity is that by the above (for example), we are automatically brought into the realm of knowing that we can not fully understand God. Which is good. When we think we fully understand God, we are in deep danger of having made our own god who is not God.

    While the Trinity does not expressly as a word in the Scriptures, that does not mean it is not present. We need to start with the beginning, though. God is one. One of the biggest dangers with the Trinity is that the confusion that we are talking about 3 gods, rather than 1 God.

    In the Gospels, Matthew has the 2 best almost explicit statements regarding the Trinity. With Jesus’ , Jesus is baptized, “laid upon” by the Holy Spirit, and blessed (and proclaimed) by God (the Father). All 3 persons of the Trinity are present and noted as being present (rather than in other places where they can be assumed to be present).

    In many respects, however, it is Jesus’ Commission of the Disciples (now Apostles) to baptize in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that there is an expression of the doctrine and persons of the Trinity (yet, still no word “Trinity”).

    While this is so, there is something critically important in Peter’s letter. Peter all but declares the Trinity in his opening. There are several reasons this is important. First, it’s Peter. His place as one of Jesus’ core disciples, and his place as commissioned leader of the church (by Jesus) makes his words critically important to our understanding of the church.

    Before the “doctrine” was declared, before the Athanasian Creed was written, before the understood writing of the Gospels, Peter brought the Trinity to the church.

    In lieu of prayer or questions, and in honor of the tradition in more “liturgical” churches to it on Trinity Sunday, below is the Athanasian Creed.
    ※Athanasian Creed※

    Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic[1] Faith. Which Faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, That we one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.

    For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

    But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is all one, the equal, the Majesty co-eternal.

    Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.

    The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.

    The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.

    The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.

    And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal.

    As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.

    So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Spirit Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.

    So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

    So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord.

    And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity, to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.

    The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten.

    The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. Likewise also the Holy Spirit is of the Father, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

    So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons, one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other, none is greater, or less than another; But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together, and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.

    Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds, and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world; perfect God, and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and flesh subsisting; equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead, and inferior to the Father, as touching his Manhood.

    Who although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but one Christ; one; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God; one altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven; He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into everlasting, and they that have done into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.