We'd appreciate you allowing the use of cookies. They are anonymized while allowing us to see how the site is used.

Devotion.al

Tag: church

  • Covenantal Bride

    Ezekiel 16:7–22, 2 Corinthians 11:1–4, Revelation 19:6–9

    The image of the church as the bride of Jesus was not a new concept. Israel/Judah was often compared to a wife, though, sadly, often an unfaithful wife. Despite the seeming graphic nature of this passage in Ezekiel, there is a strong implication of innocence, harking back to the Garden of Eden (prior to the Fall), when Adam and Eve were naked and unashamed. The bride (Israel/Judah) found in the wilds was innocent.

    Where it becomes interesting (and disturbing) is after the hinted marriage (covenant). Very quickly the bride wanders away giving all that she has to others that are not her husband. This motif of unfaithfulness covers much of the story in the Old Testament. The Chosen People—the bride of God—did not remain faithful to the one who chose them.

    Despite this being the central theme of the Old Testament, it is not as if God gave up. Paul uses the imagery of a virgin (i.e., innocent) bride being presented to Jesus (God). It is not insignificant that Paul perceived the need to use this imagery. Despite the unfaithfulness to God in the Old Testament and the unfaithfulness to God (Jesus) in the New Testament, there is something significant in this marriage motif.

    Despite the altered state of marriage in our day and age in a myriad of ways, marriage is still very much part of God’s plan for us. While we, the “church”, usually focus on marriage as a societal, cultural, and religious piece, for God it is something far deeper. Paul uses the marriage imagery in a culture that does not, generally, view it as covenant. It is contractual. Yet, Paul maintains its covenant view, even apologizing for being foolish/silly. Imagine trying to convey the depth of the covenantal nature of marriage to people who don’t see God in it.

    Paul wants the Corinthians (and us) to not view our relationship with Jesus as transactional, but relational and covenantal. This covenantal view means that Jesus is at the center and core of the relationship, not just with God, but with others.

    Both Paul (2 Corinthians) and John (Revelation) view the bride as being prepared. Of course, in Revelation, it is at the conclusion of it all. For Paul, it is the ever-present tension of a bride being ready to give all (prepared) and getting ready to give all (preparing). The bride will always be getting more ready, to always be closer to perfection, even if it is at an inch at a time. The question is, does the bride think He is worth it?

    1) When you look at yourself, how do you see yourself prepared for and preparing for Jesus? How do you think the church is prepared and preparing for Jesus?

    2) How have you been transactional in your relationship with Jesus? How do you think the church has been transactional in its relationship with Jesus?

  • Closing the Gap

    Exodus 32:1–14, Numbers 14:11–24, Ezekiel 22:30-31, Matthew 18:18–20

    Standing in the gap has long been a phrase used for intercessory prayer, and it is fitting. Sometimes, however, standing in the gap doesn’t always mean what we think it means.

    Twice Moses stands “in the gap” apparently between God and the Israelites. The Israelites have betrayed their agreements with God, even so quickly after their miracle-filled escape from Egypt. What possessed Moses to stand between God and the Israelites? Was it truly concern for God’s glory? Scripture only really provides that interpretation. In fact, it happens twice. Moses stands between God and the Israelites.

    It’s Moses! Of course, Moses can do that! There is the time Abraham sort-of steps in between God and the city of Sodom, but it wasn’t the same.

    Yet, in Ezekiel, we see that perhaps it isn’t an Abraham or Moses task to stand in the gap. It’s anyone’s task (or even everyone’s). Re-read those 2 verses in Ezekiel. It seems as if God is disappointed that no one is standing between God and consequences. God was looking for a person to stand up and defend the sinners, lost, and unrighteous! Sound familiar? There is an inference that there was such a lack of believers and followers that they couldn’t, wouldn’t, or felt they shouldn’t stand in the gap.

    Where does that leave us? Let’s look at Jesus’ words. They have long been used by the Roman Catholic church for certain practices of theirs. Abuses of it helped to trigger the Reformation. However, in so doing, these words are avoided by Protestant circles. Regardless of our personal feelings, these words of Jesus remind us that we are called to stand in the gap for others.

    While we are especially to stand in the gap for those in the extended family of believers, we are also called to do the same for those currently outside of the family of believers.

    1) What do you think of the “whatever” that is in Jesus’ words?

    2) For whom in the family of believers are you standing in the gap? For whom that are outside of the family are you standing in the gap?

    3) Looking at (Abraham,) Moses, Ezekiel, and Jesus, what does it mean to be standing in the gap?

  • Unpolishing the Church

    Haggai 2:1–9, Matthew 16:13–20

    There is a lot of hand-wringing about the demise of the church. To put things in perspective, it is often better to read the Old Testament than the New. Yet people often skip all the prophets because it appears so dark and heart-wrenching. It is.

    God’s sadness, anger, jealousy, loss are all there in those pages. The hearts of the prophets are there, too. God and prophets yearning for the people to fully return to God.

    As the church looks around and sees its influence diminishing, and churches closing, and people leaving the church, and then the faith, it would seem that all is lost. The shininess is all gone, now.

    The temple was once big and shiny. It had lots of beautiful things. It had lots of worshippers and visitors. It had lots of priests. It didn’t last long. The church, on the other hand, has had a long run of it. Perhaps, just perhaps, it’s time for us to dispense with the shiny.

    Haggai’s message was that a shiny temple didn’t mean that God wasn’t present. In fact, God’s presence has nothing to do with the shiny temple.

    Jesus’ disciples didn’t have a shiny place. While they were tolerated, they were allowed to worship at the temple, but eventually (over time) that became dangerous. They couldn’t gather at they synagogues, either. They could only gather in private homes. The gatherings were about Jesus, not the place, just as the Jewish gatherings should have been about God, not the place.

    1)When you think about the “state” of the “church”, what do you feel?

    2) When others comment or make a declaration about the “bad” state of the church, how do you respond?

    3) Do you think your responses are based more on you, or on God?

  • Believing Dress-Up

    2 Corinthians 6:3–18, 2 Corinthians 11:12–15, 1 John 4:1–6

    Paul is not a happy camper. The Corinthians appear to be pulling away from him for 2 reasons. The first is that he sent a letter that hurt (or offended) them. It seems likely that it wasn’t the letter we call 1 Corinthians, but a different one that we don’t have. The other reason was they were being drawn in by “super” apostles or other charismatic leaders that guided them away from Paul and likely the other elders of the church.

    While many people have concluded Paul’s statements about being unequally yoked with unbelievers as being focused on idol worshippers and Judaizers, in the context of this letter it isn’t about the obvious unbelievers. It’s about the unbelievers “dressed-up” as Christians! When we think about it, it is those unbelievers “dressed-up” as Christians that can pull people away from church, faith, Jesus, God.

    The world around us often uses the old Satan imagery to offend and desensitize us. The so-called Satanist religion tries to present itself as normal. Pagan folklore and witchcraft (druidic and other types) have also become more common. These are relatively easy things to see. That is what makes them scary. What if they are no different than they were in Paul’s day (?)…a distraction.

    As John admonishes us, test the angels. Paul says that Satan dresses up as an angel in white. This is not to say, kick out everyone that doesn’t believe exactly what we (or the Church of the Nazarene) believe. It is to say that all angels (maybe especially angels?) and prophets and pastors and elders and teachers and everybody else are to be tested against scripture.

    1) What are your thoughts about the dangers of “dressed-as” Christians versus believers in other religions?

    2) How do you train yourself to test angels?

    3) Angels are culturally popular. They are also often misunderstood. What do you think of being charged to test angels?

  • The Duty to Pass On

    1 Timothy 4:13–16, Romans 12:3–8, Acts 20:22–32

    Teaching is a core function of passing on the faith. There have been plenty of stories (and continue to be) of people coming to Jesus without being taught about Jesus. The Holy Spirit moves as God wills. By and large, though, people need to be taught about Jesus.

    Teachers of the Word, as some like to say, are very important to the passing on of the faith. They are not parents (in this context), they are not spiritual mentors (again, in this context). They teach the parents and the spiritual mentors in their faith so that they will pass it on. Preaching and teaching are the primary modes of this teaching.

    What also was tied into teaching, was care. In today’s age, we call it being a pastor (or pastoring). It is not just the domain of Pastors, it is also the responsibility of elders (wisdom and duration, not age) in the faith. The reason this is part of it is in hopes to prevent people from introducing false beliefs and pulling people away from the faith.

    The reason all of this is important is that there really is a call in scripture for there to be pastors, leaders, and elders. The purpose is for any to lord over other power and authority, but to help prevent people from adding and taking away pieces of the faith.

    Many Christians now look at the church as an ancient tie that needs to be tossed away. Scripture does not give us that freedom, nor does human nature. In Robert Robinson’s hymn Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing, he writes, “…Let thy goodness, like a fetter, bind my wandering heart to thee…” It is nature of fallen humanity to wander away from God. Without accountability to something greater to ourselves, we will wander away. It may be with good intentions, but those intentions need to be tempered.

    1) Whether teacher, pastor, “shepherd”, elder, parent, mentor, how is your passing on of the faith held accountable? If it is not, what can you do bring such accountability into your life?

    2) What are some bad reasons, do you think, that people want to throw “church” into the trash bin? What are some good reasons?

    3) What do you find beneficial in regards to church? What can you do to build that up with others?

  • 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 gift. It is also a curse. 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 assume 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 Christian life 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 reconciled 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 trust. 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 speak the grace of the Gospel?

    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

    Jesus 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 power of God is active in our lives. We want to know that God loves the world…and even us.

    Ultimately, with Jesus’ death, the Holy Spirit 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 wonder 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 response?

    2) Have you ever prayed for someone else (especially not family), 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 united with your church framily 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 heart for me…Do not banish me…sustain me…sinners will return 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 truth and wisdom, it has almost become the default setting that Jesus 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 bride of Jesus—doing that?
    Is the church so concerned about purity—and apparent holiness—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 power), the barrier became toeing the party line (in both Western and Eastern Christendom).

    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 together. 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 Holy Spirit 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?

  • 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 forward to the kingdom of God. John describes him as a secret disciple of Jesus. 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 conversation. 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 name of Jesus, but his actions show a heart 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 Church. 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 family’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 living 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 meet, 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?

  • A Clean Tongue

    Colossians 3:1–11

    Paul’s list of idolatrous tendencies to be put to death 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. Evil 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 sin 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 perspective, 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 framily 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 Christian witness. 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 disagree 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 response 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?