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

  • Goal of One

    Psalm 122, Isaiah 14:1–2, John 17:20–26, Acts 1:12–14

    Psalm 122 is a prayer for the flourishing of a community. Love for Jerusalem is symbolic of loving God’s bride, as Jerusalem is often tied to being the bride of God. Loving God’s bride is to be a sign of God’s people.

    Part of Isaiah’s vision is that love of Jerusalem is a shared love of both the Israelite and gentile. And what about the slaves? Note how they (those would be slaves) are those who escort Israel home. Yet, it is more appropriate to think of them as servants, as in the Hebrew they labor for the Israelites. From our perspective, one might even bring in Jesus’ words about serving one another.

    Which brings us to Jesus’ words in John regarding being one. As we look at Scripture, being one is regardless of origin (neither Jew nor Gentile). The “oneness” is what matters. All are servants (and disciples) in the presence of the Master (Jesus). Being one is hard work. Being one starts with love. Being one involves prayer, for, let’s be honest, we need prayer to love and submit to one another.

    After Jesus’ ascension, the disciples regularly gathered. They prayed together and were of one accord. The Greek ὁμοθυμαδόν—homothumadon [hom·oth·oo·mad·on]—is a compound word meaning rushing together. Some linguists put it as praying for the same thing, and others take it as if people were “singing/playing” different notes in the same song. Either way, it resolves into people praying toward the same goal, but not necessarily the same way or at the same time.

    1) Why should prayer be toward the same goal? What should the goal(s) be?

    2) In the midst of our political, cultural, national, denominational differences, how can the church be “one”? What can you do to “aim” to “oneness”?

    3) There is “the other” and there is “one”. How can we be the bridge between these two perspectives?

  • Ruling Tradition

    Psalm 79, Romans 15:1–13, 1 Corinthians 8:1–13, Galatians 2:11–15

    Yesterday we talked about rules. Today we’re going to talk about rules.
    One of the first rules of framily is to build up one another. We have all done this well. We have all done this horribly. Another rule is to live in harmony with each other. Yet another is to accept one another. These rules are incredibly important when we disagree (see Thursday’s, 23 May, devotional). Doing all of these well is hard, and it is well worth doing.

    One thing that always ends up with some kind of tension is tradition and misunderstanding. When Paul discusses food offered to idols, his perspective is it’s fine, since they aren’t real idols anyways. The meat was sold at a discount since it was “used” at pagan temples to “feed” their gods. Paul was saying it was food. He was supporting the practice, except that there were new or struggling or misunderstanding members of the church who saw the buying and eating of this meat as participating in and agreeing with idol worship. Paul didn’t agree with them, yet still instructed the more mature believers to avoid the cheap food so that those struggling wouldn’t succumb to the old ways.

    Paul is not shy in taking on fellow leaders, like Peter, who quickly yield to tribal (i.e., Jewish) pressure to not be contaminated by Gentiles. What makes this even more interesting in regards to tradition, it was Peter who led the charge against it. Even the leaders fall back into old habits.

    1) What is the difference between traditions and rules?

    2) How do they function differently in your life? How about your faith life?

    3) How do we confuse rules and traditions with our faith?

  • Frameworks and Consequences

    Acts 10:9–35, Acts 15:5–34, Romans 14:13-23

    Rules are everywhere, aren’t they? Rules are a good thing. Often rules give us the freedom to act for we have a pretty good idea what others will do (assuming they know the rules). This is true in examples such as driving. We know (we hope) what the other person will do, as they should have learned (and been tested) the same rules.
    Rules are often also put into place to better level the playing field. These rules are often disliked, not because the concept is bad, but because the execution leaves a lot to be desired.

    Another set of very important rules are those for leaders or in other responsible positions. People, for example, who are in charge of educating, children, and money should all follow rules, so that everyone knows what their obligations are. Often, sadly, the rules are put into place after someone else has done something wrong, so the “good” folks don’t like to be treated like the bad ones. That is the whole rotten apple ruins it for everyone concept.

    Peter was schooled on the rules. In this case, these rules were put into place for the Israelites (then Jews) to follow. The problem was that God wasn’t just calling the Jews. The official reach had expanded. The rules that Peter lived by had outlived their usefulness, and now were a barrier to the world.

    After his vision and experience with the Gentiles, he then had to remind his fellow Jews (whom he had previously told this story to) that they couldn’t live up to the rules either. They certainly had a quick revision of “the rules”.
    Yet, even in Rome (the “home” of the Gentiles) the rules were still an issue and were a hindrance to the church and the hearts of its people. Rules are a framework of behavior. They should not crush spirits, or seek to destroy lives. Yet, the consequences of breaking the rules are not the same as the rules themselves. Consequences are the result of our choices, yet we often blame the rules.

    1) When have you found rules to be helpful at work, at home, at church?

    2) When have you found rules to be more crushing of spirit, rather than a framework of guidance/protection?

    3) When do you find rules to be a problem? Have you ever analyzed your response to the rules to see if it is your pride or the effect of the rule that you are reacting to?

  • Lead In Love

    Mark 9:33–37, Acts 15:36-41, 1 Timothy 6:3–11

    It is an amazing fact that you might have learned yourself: people are different, and don’t always agree.
    There are various kinds of disagreements, and it is not necessarily bad to disagree. In fact, it is often through disagreements that better solutions, not just compromise, can be found. In our current political environment, compromise is now a bad thing, as members of both Republican and Democrat parties entrench themselves. While the President may be the focal point, the reality is people seem to have lost the ability to discuss hard things without devolving to name calling and pointless posturing.

    The disciples argued with each other regarding who was first among Jesus’ disciples. Two of them, Peter and John, probably had the strongest claim (from what scripture tells), but that this argument appeared to be amongst all of them indicates that Peter and John’s “ranking” was not as prominent as we think. This would be a pointless argument. While figuring out who is the leader is often a good discussion at other times, their little group had a leader…Jesus.

    The “sharp disagreement” between Paul and Barnabas is one of the biggest examples that not everything went perfectly well and peaceful all the time in the church. John Mark was the point of contention. What the exact issue was, both past and possible future, we can guess. Neither leader (for both were leaders) felt they could compromise regarding John Mark. They separated after being together so long. They had some sort of reconciliation later. This shows us that we can disagree well, and part ways. It doesn’t seem that either held it against the other for long.

    Paul understands that there will be conflict and arguments. In his letter to his protégé, Timothy, Paul doesn’t say don’t argue, but that people who seek argument are to be corrected. We all want to be right (and viewed that way), but most of us are aware of our limitations. We are able to be humble when wrong.
    As the world starts to stop talking and only yell, the church (with its many human failings) should show the way. As the church deals with uncomfortable topics, it should lead in love. This starts right here with our framily.

    1) Have you ever had an argument which has been left unresolved, and thus straining or destroying a relationship? Was it friends, immediate family, or was it framily? What can you do to resolve things?

    2) Why is it so important to understand that we don’t always agree and that it is okay?

  • Among Crowds

    Psalm 26, Matthew 21:42–46, Acts 13:43–52

    Crowds are a powerful thing. They can be a source of powerful change. In the current age, people are helping to launch products they want by putting some of their money into it. By doing so, people go around the big companies that controlled how new things came to market. Yes, there have been massive failures. There have also been fantastic successes. On the other hand, crowds often act like unrestrained monsters, attacking people, destroying property, killing, looting.

    What motivates a crowd is the most interesting, as it will vary person to person. For example, there were people who just followed Jesus. There were people who followed Jesus because other people followed Jesus. Then there were those who sought to control Jesus (including making him their king). There there were those who were jealous of his innate popularity in comparison to the false fawning they experienced due to their positions in Jewish society.

    Paul and Barnabas also drew crowds. Through their words they drew Jews and Gentiles to Jesus. Yet, there were those who were jealous of the crowds and stirred up trouble forcing them to leave.
    This is still going on today. The draw of social media has been that it is where everything is happening. The problem is that it is where everything is happening. People are becoming fatigued with it all, yet are now so conditioned to live with it.

    Then there are all the “happening” places. Even churches and their leaders succumb to the crowd-jealousy. Churches and church leaders look to see what the “popular” churches and leaders are doing and often try to copy them. However, just like going along with the crowd, what is good for the crowd may not be good for you. The flip side of that is what is good for you may not be good for the crowd, or at least many in it.

    1) How do see yourself when looking at others who appear more successful or happy than you?

    2) Why are crowds a bad barometer for choosing the right path? Why are crowds a good barometer for choosing the right path?

    3) Whether we acknowledge it or not, we watch the crowds. What is the right way to respond to and view the crowds?

  • Dancing Fools

    Psalm 148, 2 Samuel 6:12–22, Matthew 6:1–8

    Do or do not before others?

    David danced in all his power during a massive 10 mile parade, taking the Ark from Obed-edom’s land to Jerusalem. He was the king. There were many sacrifices happening. There were all the musicians, followers and soldiers that would have been a part of this. What a spectacle that must have been! We see that the Bible specifically says that David was dancing before the Lord.

    His first wife, Micah, watched the parade from the city. His disgraceful behavior (from her perspective) tainted her views of David, and forever destroyed their relationship. There is a strong sense that she feels that a “royal” person (especially the king) should act more dignified before the people (and this would have political ramifications with any so-called nobility or courtiers). David’s response is classic. He’s okay being undignified before God, because the people will recognize his “poor” behavior for what it is…worship of God. It would seem he was right.

    Jesus, on the other hand, was dealing with something that superficially the same. The rich and powerful trumpeted their successes, power, wealth, and pretend generosity. The people got on board and praised them for it all. The differences are heart deep. The rich and powerful really didn’t care as much about God, as they did about the wagging tongues of people. They cared about their power and influence, and what they could do with it. The people did what they did to survive culturally, socially, financially, and live. There was no love or respect toward the rich and powerful.

    Often the words of Jesus are spoken to chide people from taking false pride and putting it on display. As Jesus said, that is their reward, with the implication being that they get the reward in this life, and there will be no reward for them in next. Yet, it is not bad to take pride in public actions. If Generations Community Church were to help a working mother put a down payment on a house of her own, yes, it would be good to be public about it, but not to brag on it, or expect a reward for it. Now, notice that this applies to the Framily, not to the individual. That would be a different story, maybe. Taking this working mother story further, it would be dishonoring of the woman to brag on the story, for then it becomes more about Generations than the reconciliation of a woman.

    1) How does one praise and parade in front of God, publically, without being seen as one seeking the adoration of people?

    2) While you may not seem rich and powerful, how do behave like those like Michal, and like those that Jesus spoke against?

    3) Would you be willing to dance like a crazy person (before God) down the middle of Main Street?

  • Not Regardless

    Psalm 116:12–17, John 6:54–69, Acts 9:31–43

    Yesterday, we briefly touched on the reality that the world doesn’t like the entirety of the message of Jesus. It struggles with nice and submission. Add on the whole eternal life piece and the world casts it off. Other beliefs that the church has wrestled with and argued over often confuse people (believers and non-believers alike), providing an additional excuse to ignore the message. This is not to say that having an excuse means that everything is just fine. On the contrary, it often means that the heart is hard toward the Holy Spirit.
    When Peter asks to whom will they go, Peter could be really asking a number of things. First, he’s (they’re) all in. Second, no one else speaks/convinces like Jesus. We speak about the hard sayings of Jesus. It is that Jesus declares himself the True Bread of Life that his disciples (both intimate and extended) call hard. Peter doesn’t say that it isn’t hard. He isn’t saying he understands. He is saying (effectively), “I trust you, Jesus, regardless of what I understand.”
    Regardless. As inheritors of the Enlightenment, we don’t function well with “regardless.” Add onto the Enlightenment inheritance our “hard” science outlook, “regardless” is even harder. This is not to say that the Enlightenment or science is all bad. It is to say that neither is all knowing.
    “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in our philosophy.” —Hamlet (from the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare)
    Hamlet, speaking to his friend, Horatio, is referring to all the knowledge and learning that he (Horatio) has gained through his education (which was significant for the time). The world hangs its hat (so to speak) solely on the philosophies of the Enlightenment and science. The irony is that the Enlightenment and science came out of religion and a desire to understand, and yet many claim that religion has nothing to do with either.
    We will always struggle with reaching the world. How could Jesus be the only way to eternal life? The world does not understand.
    Peter, on the other hand, understood the best he was able. He was knee deep in theology or philosophy. He was neck deep in following Jesus the best way he knew how. Peter was, through faith, able to heal the paralyzed. Peter was, through faith, able to raise the dead to life. Was it his power? No, and he knew it. Did he ask, how does this work? No. He just accepts. That is one of the secrets of the Very Good Life, trusting God despite one’s own lack of understanding.

    1) Why is Jesus being the Bread of Life a hard saying? If we don’t think it is, what are we missing?

    2) How do you work through the tension between science and religion? What do you think of the choice being science or religion?

  • Checkmarks and Tasks

    Galatians 2:15–3:6, Philippians 1:20–26,

    The church in Galatia was struggling. Someone was pouring bad ideas and thoughts into them, causing them to walk away from the faith that Paul had taught them. The funny thing is that many of them probably didn’t know that they were being drawn away. It is easy, step-by-step, to be drawn away. The Galatians were being influenced to follow the path of works righteousness. In other words, it was by their (righteous, performed in compliance with the law) actions that saved them. It was no longer Jesus Christ.

    Often that is the trap of holiness. Somehow, people changed good suggestions, then turned them into rules, then made them an article of salvation. In other words, they had escaped the bondage of the world, then went right back to it.
    How many people that heard this letter (the letters were usually read publicly) and shook in anger? How DARE Paul speak to us in that way? How many others shook in disbelief, amazed and saddened that they had surrendered their freedom.

    Last week, Rachel Held Evans died at the age of 37. She was a progressive Christian that challenged many evangelicals. She made many very angry, so angry one could say they cursed her. Others thought on her words, trusted her heart, and listened. That doesn’t mean she changed many minds. While that may have been her intent, it was the fact that she caused evangelicals to question and converse that made the biggest difference. Of course, there will always be those who become more rigid when challenged. There will also be those who become more grace filled when challenged, as they hear the heart and pain of others. Evans like many other progressives find their calling in challenging their perception of the status quo, and the church should be grateful.

    Not that Evans is Paul, but that we are challenged to think. Our faith isn’t one of checkmarks and tasks (salvation by works), it is one of relationship and love. Paul was happy to be alive on Earth because he saw it as his duty to challenge and encourage the church to be the church. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul wants to remain (rather than go home to Jesus) because he is watching them grow in their faith.

    1) Growth and challenge. Why is it that when we are challenged, we grow? How how you see in work, life, and faith?

    2) The church often resists being challenged, yet hindsight of history shows us that is where growth occurs. Why do we fight being challenged, especially if we know we will likely grow as a result?

    3) Progressive and Conservative Christianity both need to learn from each other. In so doing, they can show the world that opposites can work together for the common good. Thinking of your friends and family, how can you be one that learns from others and show that as the way to live?

  • The Right Ground

    1 Corinthians 15:35–49, Mark 4:1-20, John 12:12-28
    A life of holiness is a hard pill to swallow in many respects. We look around us and wonder how could any one of these fallen human beings be holy. When we look in the mirror and think even more so. Holiness has often been twisted to be living a certain way (with or without something, usually) or doing (or not doing) certain things. It has often been twisted to mean that anything that is outside of our so-called Christian culture is bad without analysis. In other words, a life of holiness has often about fulfilling certain rites, rules, and regulations.

    Now, truth be told, following God’s ways is holiness. However, it is our hearts’ response to following those ways that is a life of holiness rather than rules that makes all the difference. There have been many people who have followed the “holiness” rules of men and driven people further from Jesus Christ. There are probably people who have practiced behaviors contrary to so-called holiness rules of men that have brought more people to Jesus Christ that all of us reading this combined. Are there ways that God calls us to live? Yes. We just often have to be careful that it is not our cultural biases, prejudices, or family traditions that are imposing our way of seeing world onto God’s ways.

    Holiness starts with death. Sounds great, doesn’t it? Yet, it is death that invites us into a life with Jesus Christ. The first death, of course, was Jesus’ own on the cross. The second is our own. When Paul is talking about death, he really is speaking about the death of this body that you have. He understands that this body went through things that God never intended for his creation to be. This body was corrupted by the sin that preceded its birth, and by the sin that has corrupted its very life. Its death, therefore, is a good thing. Paul says that this death will lead to a body that is as God intended. This is the good death. Yes, that sounds strange. Death as good.

    Jesus would seem to be calling us to a brand new life. In fact, in our current sermon series, the Very Good Life. Sometimes, however, the Very Good Life isn’t exactly what we expected. Sometimes our familiarity with certain Bible stories leads us to lazy thinking. This is one of those parables that Jesus actually explained to his disciples. This is a significant event. So, we should pay particular attention to it. Based on Jesus’ explanation, we are quick to read through it and move on.
    Reread Mark 4 verses 6 and 16—17. What if we are the stony ground? Pushing on new believes (or new church people) so hard without developing their roots in faith that we destroy what roots grew and become the reason someone fell away from the church and Jesus.

    Reread Mark 4 verses 7 and 18–19. What if we are the thorns? What if our understanding of church, holiness (or “right” living), society, or politics rip and tear at people that church or we become such that we cause more pain than they can bear?

    We have all been trained to see the seeds and what ground they fell on as a parable of Jesus’ words and our readiness and willingness to listen. However, many of Jesus’ parables were not about those who were not yet followers, but about the people that claimed to follow and obey God.

    Tying both of Paul’s letter and Jesus parable of sowing are Jesus’ words in John. This becomes another what if, sort of. For a seed to truly bear fruit, it “dies”. The seed ceases to be a seed and becomes something more. Often we become so obsessed with the seed and its potential that we protect the seed—keeping it a seed—so that the seed does absolutely nothing. The potential becomes trapped. Many of us have found ourselves in that exact state. Stuck. Often times, however, we are so excited for the potential that actually developing the potential scares us. What if we do it wrong? We ask. At what point, do we take risks to develop seeds with deep roots, so that the land is expanded.

    One thing to keep in mind with the sower parable is that we are talking about wheat. This is important for a different reason. If you’ve ever been up to a mountain you have probably seen trees grow in really strange places. A tree seed lands in a crack in a rock with some dirt. Against what seems to be all odds (except that it happens a lot), the tree takes root. Over time, the tree’s roots dig deep into the rock. Eventually the rock gives and breaks. One of two things then happens. Either the tree developed enough roots to stand on its own, or it falls over and dies. However, because of its effort, another tree may grown there, where none could grow before.

    1) How have you been stony ground to others, whether in faith or in life?

    2) How have you been the thorns to others?

    3) Dying takes on many forms. Death of dreams, solitude, partnership, and other things. Scripture, however, teaches that death has been redeemed. What deaths (not just bodily) deaths can you seen in your life that have transformed you or others?

  • Inherting Legacy

    Genesis 47:18–26, Acts 4:34–5:11

    In the United States, land has long represented freedom, self-reliance, hope, and self-determination (on one hand), slavery, clearances, eviction, theft, and deceit (on the other hand. How can such divergent perspectives be? Well, for many Native Americans the initial immigration of Europeans may have not been a disaster, but what occurred especially after the Civil War (or the War Between the States) was often cruel and morally questionable (at best). For those trying to escape the crowded East Coast and the memories of the recent war and slavery, it was something to seek.

    Even today land is essential. While in the United States the land and the buildings (for example) are part of the value, in places like Japan, the land is the only thing that matter (for cultural reasons). Land has long been a symbol of power. It also is a symbol of life. It can also represent family roots.

    When the people of Egypt sell their land and themselves to Pharoah, they are surrendering their lives and that which allowed them to live. They had surrendered their future, their children’s future, and even their grandchildren’s future. In all likelihood, they sold themselves into bonded servitude to pay off the debt they took on to survive. It isn’t clear how long this servitude was to last. Theoretically, it was until the debt was paid off, however, as both the land and the people were sold, we can assume that it would take a while to pay off the debt. How the land would have been purchased back is something else. It would have been a process and a slow one. One’s only hope would be the dim one that one’s children would be free of the debt.

    With all the comes to mind in these situations, how people viewed themselves, their (lack of) freedom, or their hope (if any), is anyone’s guess. We can conclude that in desperate times that people surrendered their freedom and the one thing (land) that would allow them to continue to be free.

    Land is still pretty important. As we watch property values skyrocket, we are all very much aware of it. As more people move in, rural areas that were once affordable are no longer so. If someone were to just sell their property and give it to the framily (i.e., the church friends and family of Generations Community Church), we would all be grateful, but we would also be a bit confused. If that same person were to sell that property and only give the proceeds to those in need in the church, we would be a bit more understanding, but it would be unusual. This is not a moral judgment, but a recognition of just how strange the First Century Church was. It broke all the traditions.

    Tie this back to culture. The land was the family’s legacy and inheritance. Selling it was done only in desperation. Yet, here we are talking about exactly that. While Barnabas is called out in Acts (yes, Ananias and Sapphira are too), the implication is not that Barnabas’ act was unique, but it does imply that it was a significant sale. One of the differences that we can infer (easily) is that Barnabas did it to take care of his church family, while Ananias and Sapphira did it for acclaim. Both land sales took care of the church family, but the hearts of the sales were completely different.

    1) What relationship, reflections, and feelings do you have in regards to owning land (not necessarily buildings)?

    2) How desperate would you be to sell yourself, your property, and your foreseeable future to someone? How desperate must the Egyptians have been?

    3) What does Barnabas’ action tell you about who he viewed as family? What does that tell you about the First Century Church?