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

  • Communal Sacrifice

    Exodus 12:1–20, Nehemiah 8:1–18, Psalm 133

    The Exodus story, specifically the first Passover, always comes up around Easter. Which makes perfect sense, as Holy Week revolves around Passover, along with the seemingly obvious linking of Jesus being the ultimate Passover lamb (i.e., the sacrifice needed for Passover). All the Israelites were going to sacrifice a lamb for a household. This was a large communal thing. One could (and did) ignore it at their peril.

    Communal is something done or shared in a community, such as a church. An action done by everyone creates a powerful effect. In the US, we’ve forgotten a lot of communal activities, much of this having to do with our culture of independence. We miss a lot. It is why communal celebrations such as Communion and Baptism are so important to the life of the church. There is something also very powerful—and community building—in sharing a meal together.

    “If the household is too small for a whole animal, that person and the neighbor nearest his house are to select one based on the combined number of people; you should apportion the animal according to what each will eat.” (Exodus 12:4)

    There are 2 important observations in this verse. The first is how important and sacred this sacrifice is. Sacrifices mentioned later do not have this built-in focus on not wasting the sacrifice; just properly disposing of it. This one mentions not wasting it as part of the sacrifice itself. It is to be part of the consideration when choosing the lamb to be sacrificed. There is a shared burden for neighbors to make sure that each other has enough, but not too much.

    The second observation is that by setting this boundary, extra emphasis is added to the communal nature of this specific sacrifice. This sacrifice and celebratory observation of Passover is not to be done in isolation.
    Isolation—the internet notwithstanding—allows us to not learn from others, not to be in community with others, and not love others. When the Israelites return from exile, we read (Nehemiah 8:1-18) that the Israelites learned, mourned, and celebrated in community. Upon learning that there was supposed to be another festival—the Festival of Booths—they gather together (community) and celebrated it. Our celebrations, our learning, our mourning are (generally) more powerful in community, rather than in isolation. Fellowship and unity grow. Yet, we still tend toward isolation.

    Psalm 133 sums it up:

    How good and pleasant it is
    when brothers live together in harmony!
    It is like fine oil on the head,
    running down on the beard,
    running down Aaron’s beard
    onto his robes.
    It is like the dew of Hermon
    falling on the mountains of Zion.
    For there the Lord has appointed the blessing—
    life forevermore.

    1) Do you find yourself tending more toward isolation rather than community? Why?

    2) If you are an introvert, how will you allow yourself to be drawn and actively seek community? If you are an extrovert, how can allow and encourage people to join the community without overwhelming them?

    3) What other communal rituals (including secular ones) can you think of? What power do they have in people’s lives, and why?

  • Blessings of the Vine

    Isaiah 65:8–16, Luke 5:33–39

    In Old Testament and Jesus’ time, wine was considered a sign of God’s blessing.* In this Isaiah speech, the new wine will be the remnant that faithfully returns to God, and then to the Promised Land. The interesting play on this means that because of the old wine (Israel) that the vines (the promise to Abraham) yielded, they should be destroyed. However, “one says” that there is hope in the new fruit. This new potential is followed by a reclaimed swamp (Sharon) for pasture, and “cursed”/barren land (Valley of Achor) as a place of rest.

    Isaiah’s speech continues down a course of punishment for those who don’t (and/or continue to not) follow God. At the same time there is a promise of blessing for those who will follow God. The new wine indeed came and people returned to the Promised Land.

    Yet, the new wine can become old, and it did. It wasn’t aging well, according to Jesus. The modern process of winemaking is both art and science. Vintners are pretty confident with their wines that they will get better with age. There are wines that don’t get better with age, too. In older days, however, the precision wasn’t there, especially as part of the fermenting process. BAD wine and vinegar were common results. Was Jesus saying that the wine (the Pharisees and scribes, scions of the Jewish Law and religions) was bad? Maybe, but it is more likely that Jesus was saying that the aging process was no longer effective (just like real wine), and it was time for something new.

    This parable is often used to “prove” that Christianity was the new replacement for Judaism. It is used regularly to encourage churches to not hold too tightly to the old ways. Which is valid. However, the beauty of this version of the parable (see Matthew 9:14-17 for the other version) is the added line about the old wine. One must remember that the old wine was once new, too. The old wine has value.

    If Jesus is the vine (or root), and we are the branches (John 15:1-8), we should all be producing new fruit, which makes new wine. Let us not keep focusing on old wine already made.

    1) When you look at “the church” (all the claimants to Christianity), where do you see “new wine” and where do you see “old wine”?

    2) Your “old wine” used to be the “new wine”, even if you think you’re young, that’s so. Why is important to see the value in old and new?

    3) The wine and wineskins age together, how does that mirror our growth in faith and grace?

    *As a denomination in the temperance (abstaining from alcohol) camp, the Church of the Nazarene (and other similar denominations) often struggle to call wine a sign of God’s blessing. By God’s grace, Thomas Welch invented (or perfected) the process by which grape juice fermentation would cease, and no longer produce an alcoholic beverage. This did allow temperance folks to have a “fruit of the vine” that met the theological needs of Communion and the theological/pastoral needs of ministering to those affected by alcohol or had another philosophical opposition to alcoholic beverages.

  • Being and Becoming the Bridge

    Isaiah 30:18–26, Isaiah 61:10–11, 1 Corinthians 3:5–11, 1 Corinthians 11:23–26

    We are the bridge between the past and the future, with one foot in the past and one foot in the future.

    The past of glory was gone, a faded memory. Perhaps to some it was just an old tale that was from the crazy aunt. David and Solomon? Sure. Whatever you say, Auntie.

    Into hearts that resided in darkness, Isaiah spoke light and life. People who felt oppressed were promised the freedom of planting crops and harvesting them on their own behalf, not under the rule of foreigners. Not only that, Isaiah told them that they would turn their backs on their treasured idols. They were being told that the little gods that had protected them would be thrown away. That’s crazy!

    Isaiah later talks about the earth and garden producing as they should, because God has provided salvation and blessed them. Not their idols. The promise of God’s blossoming righteousness in the hearts of people who had abandoned their God who had chosen them to bear his name.

    Death to life. During this series of devotions, we haven’t spoken much on Lent, but with this last devotion for the Legacy series it seems appropriate. Lent comes from Old English and German, meaning spring. Spring comes at the end of Winter (the land almost “dead”, but waiting to come alive). Just like the Jews, who were in their “Winter”, so are we before our salvation.

    Paul and Apollos worked on ground that wasn’t yet “alive”. Yet, they planted the faith and watered it. Eventually, new growth in dead ground came alive and blossomed. While others were fighting over who they followed (Paul, Apollos, or others), these coworkers in Christ looked ahead to see a crop that God empowered them to see, even if they did not see it now.

    Our bridge from death to life and from past to future is the legacy of our faith. Paul proclaims it best, “…as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” The past and future. While we remember and honor the past, we must look to the future of ourselves, our family, our church, our faith, and the world.

    1) What do you think the future of this church should look like? What can you do to help that vision come to pass?

    2) Often, we are blinded to our vision of the future, and thus tear down the future visions of others. What can you and we do to embrace the visions of others for the future?

    3) Paul’s concluding statement covers both past and future. How can Paul’s conclusion empower and educate your vision and how to make it come to pass?

  • Communional Mystery

    John 6:54–66, Zechariah 3:1–4, Romans 8:31–39

    The how of Communion has been a mystery of and for the church. How it works has been (and continues to be) a strong discussion point between traditions and denominations. What hasn’t been a discussion point is that it does work. The long practice of Communion ties generations to the past, communities together, connects hearts and minds to the faith. At the beginning, even before Jesus’ death on the cross, it was a dividing point. People took a very literal view of Jesus’ wording, which turned them away from him. Those that knew him—the 12 disciples—didn’t walk away. They seemed to have some understanding that Jesus wasn’t being as literal as others had assumed. That does not mean they completely understood. They did, however, know Jesus, so instead of insisting to understand, they accepted. Jesus did make accepting blood and flesh crucial to being his follower, and receiving eternal life. Thus Communion is not just something we do lightly.

    Communion is part of the transformed/transforming/being-transformed life of being a Christian. It is part of our adoption into God’s family. As we become, and continue to be, a part of God’s family, we can rely and trust in Paul’s words about those who accuse us. The accusations of being nonredeemable and unredeemed are the same accusations that Zechariah saw Satan throw at Joshua (a high priest, not the prophet who followed Moses). The same filthy rags that were removed from Joshua (and by extensions, the Jews), are those removed from us when we accept Jesus Christ.

    The Accuser (whether Satan or people who seek to pull us down) is a constant threat to a Christian (or anyone). However, when we have Jesus Christ and are in fellowship with him, the accusations are merely empty words. The words and spirit behind them hurt, but we turn to Jesus who wipes away our tears and hurt. Communion is that constant reminder that God is the host of the banquet. He has clothed us in white, even though we cannot see it.

    1) Have you ever come across a time or place where Communion separated, rather than joined, people to Christ and the greater body? What was it like?

    2) Have you ever thought about the importance of Communion in regards to your salvation? How do you think that works?

    3) Accusations can often keep us away from the table. When you “hear” accusations, how do you deal with them? Do you bring them to others, or do you bear them alone?

  • 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 stumble 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 son 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 promise 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 Christian 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 Trinity, 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 holy 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 eternal. God becomes incarnate. God is with us (Emmanuel).

    Even as God with us, Jesus 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 united 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 word 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?

  • Practice Feasting

    Deuteronomy 14:22–26, Acts 2:36–42

    Feasting in the presence of the Lord is a strong theme in all the Jewish feast times. Feasting in God’s presence provides a physical reminder that it is by God’s grace and power that there is something to feast with. It also reminds us that God is God. It keeps us balanced so that we do not think that the feast is because of ourselves or our works.

    That something so basic and essential to living (food) is considered a vital part of righteous worship, should help us to not dismiss it. While we may joke about church potlucks, in many respects such gatherings are feasting in the presence of the Lord. While overeating is not good, eating together is.

    When the early “church” of Acts eats together, we’re talking about all sorts of people. While they all were Jews (at this point, with some Gentile converts), that doesn’t mean they all got along. There were fishermen, tax collectors, Levites, merchants, soldiers, guardsmen. In other words, there was a cross-section of Jewish society. They made it a practice of breaking bread together. There is a context to this breaking of bread. These people listened to the Apostles’ (we’d say the New Testament) Teaching (sermons and preaching), to fellowship (more than meet and greet at the door), and prayer. It is all four elements together that were practiced.

    1) Have you ever made the decision to avoid the sermon or other teachings? How about fellowship? How about breaking bread together? How about prayer?

    2) This is not to be a guilt trip, but a time of reflection. Why did you avoid 1 or more of these practices? Is it a regular thing? If so, what can you do to restore this 4-fold practice into your life?

    3) In Acts 3:41, Luke notes that about 3000 people were added to the church. Just like today, a place where 3000 people could gather to hear/learn, fellowship, break bread, and pray is pretty hard to find. How do you think the early church did it? How can that inform the practices in your life?

  • Welcomed To The Table

    Genesis 12:1-7, Ruth 2:13–19, Job 31:24–32

    For many of us (if not most), the call of Abram (who would become Abraham) doesn’t seem that significant from a strictly human perspective. Yes, any of us would find being called by God significant, but the calling away from relatives and land is not so strange. This is not the case here. There is a relationship with the land. The land of one’s ancestors. There is also the concept of leaving one’s family.

    American culture, especially Western American culture, has some significant breaks with the culture of Abram. The settler and/or explorer mentality which underlies much of American founding is not conducive to family roots, or least always staying near home. America celebrates individuality and individual freedom to culturally understand what God is having Abram do. The only exception to this break had been agricultural families, but with the increasing transformation from family to corporate farms, even that is going away.

    Abram was separated from his family and land by choice. Yes, it was God’s direction, but in his culture, leaving was a big break. While he had his household, he was now a household of wanderers. Where is home for such wandering group? By leaving the ties of the land, Abram would now effectively be a guest wherever he went.

    Ruth was the same. Yes, she had married an Israelite, but he was dead. She didn’t have to leave her homeland. However, in her heart she had made a decision that her husband’s family was truly her own, breaking her family ties. What made her decision even more significant was that all that was left of her husband’s immediate family was his widowed mother. Not much of a family structure for support. Now that Ruth and Naomi were back in Israelite land, Ruth was now responsible for both. By the grace of God, she fell into the care of Boaz, a distant relative. Boaz welcomed her above and beyond a servant. He truly welcomed her to his table to eat. She had no functional value to him, yet he welcomed her.

    And welcoming others to the table is what Job did, too. He was righteous in this. It wasn’t that he had a long line of people that would take advantage of this ( strong cultural taboo against it), so turning people away likely didn’t happen. He welcomed people to the table.

    1) Abram was a guest. Why would other landowners welcome him to their table? Why might they not?

    2) Culturally, much of American culture has turned away from welcoming strangers (hospitality). Why do you think that is? When do you think it started to change?

    3) Generations Community Church (along with the Church of the Nazarene) practices “Open Communion.” How does that apply to Abram, Ruth, and Job? How do Abram, Ruth, and Job apply to “Open Communion?”

  • Cup of Blessing

    Psalm 16, Luke 24:13–35

    Psalm 16 is considered by many to be a Messianic Psalm. Peter and Paul both seemed to have some agreement on this as they appear to have referenced as it appears to be referenced to by them in a number of places. One of the contrasts is the cup of blood (v4) and the cup of blessing (v5). The cup of blood is what is used to pour out the drink offering. This is a play on the “right” drink offering before God, which was the fruit of the vine. Instead, this blood offering is an unrighteous offering, not only because of the conflict of the drink offering but also—and primarily—the offering was to a god other than God. In other words, those who were making these blood offerings had chosen to follow false gods for their security.

    On the contrary, the cup of blessing is a Godly portion which holds promise and blessing. The cup of blessing comes with an inheritance. The cup of blessing comes with Godly fortitude (not false fortitude). The cup of blessing comes with security. And, lastly, the cup of blessing comes with the path of eternal life. With all of that, one can easily see why Messianic is applied to this psalm, especially in the context of communion.

    In the context of scripture (and yesterday’s sermon), we have talked about the institution of communion, which was Jesus’ Last Supper with his disciples, and was observed within the context of Passover. One could say that Cleopas and the other disciple (some believe it was his wife) experienced the first “true” communion. In many ways, it is the exclamation point on Paul’s words, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes”(1 Corinthians 11:26). Seeing is believing. They saw their Lord alive after he was dead, and declared alive again. They became witnesses to his bodily resurrection. What a way to know in your heart what the new covenant included!

    1) Do you remember your first communion? If not, that’s okay. If you do, what do you remember? Do you remember the last communion you took? If so, what do you remember?

    2) In certain church communities communion is taken individually Why do you think that is? Generations Community this coming Sunday, will take communion in framily groups? Why is this important?

    3) Why is the individual and group taking of communion important? What does this tell us about church-, faith-, and community-life?

  • The Proper Guest

    Psalm 104:1–15, John 6:53–58, 1 Corinthians 11:17–11:27

    From the Christian perspective, God breathed life into us. We’re not just talking about the lungs, but the spiritual life, too. God is the great sustainer. While there are those whose perspective of God is the Clockwork God (the concept that God started the whole thing and “walked away”) and others for whom it is only biological life and no spirit, most people seem to be between. The two “extremes” operate within the framework that God is not active, and God does not interact with creation. Again, because one perspective has God off who knows where, and the other perspective has no God (or other “force” for that matter). There is an odd in-between version of the Holy Spirit as a non-personal “force”, but that is even harder to comprehend.
    From an orthodox Christian perspective, without God’s spirit, we would truly be nothing more than mere biological machines. When we look at humanity, despite its often horrible state, we cannot help perceiving that there is something far more significant than just being a machine.

    What happens, though, when someone takes normal things and makes them anything but normal? Ask Jesus.

    When Jesus calls on people to eat his flesh and drink his blood, let’s be honest, it isn’t normal. The church has long held the view that there is definitely something going on here. On one hand, there are those that believe that when we take communion, we are literally (not just spiritually) eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus (called transubstantiation, if you want to know). There are those that believe that it is merely (and only) a memorial, we do it solely because Jesus (and Paul) told us to (which are good reasons), and because the church has done it for centuries (tradition is not a bad reason either). There are two other major perspectives. Consubstantiation is a belief that it is both body and bread, and blood and wine. The last belief is that while it is “just” bread and wine (in the Nazarene and other denominations, grape juice), it is far more than “just” that. There is an understanding that Jesus is present at the table presiding over communion, in the same spirit as the Last Supper.

    Think of that. You’re eating in the presence of Jesus, as a guest.

    Regardless of your perspective on communion, the church (Orthodox to Roman Catholic to Protestant) calls it a sacrament. What is a sacrament? It is something instituted by an act of Jesus. Within the larger Protestant grouping, it is one of two sacraments, the other being baptism. Other traditions count additional acts as sacraments, but communion and baptism are universal.

    There is another aspect that is crucial to the sacraments…ourselves. Sacraments are instituted by God, so we don’t make them holy. However, Paul warns everyone to take them seriously. This is why an understanding of at whose table you are eating is so important. Not only are you eating and drinking with your local church family, there is the larger denomination, the church as a whole (again, across denominations), and with the church universal (both before and after us). It should never be something approached flippantly. This does not you cannot be joyful. In fact, joyful and thankful should be the exact perspective we bring to the table.

    1) For some communion should be done rarely; at most, once a month. For others, communion is weekly. For others still, it is every worship (which can be many times in a week). What is your perspective? Why? Can you see why others might have a different perspective?

    2) Do you ever think of Jesus hosting your table during communion? Does that impact how you view communion, and your participation in it?

    3) Why do you think Jesus and Paul emphasize the body and blood? What is the significance of those two words?

  • False Sacraments

    Joshua 22:9–34, 1 Samuel 2:12–17, Psalm 40

    What’s for dinner?

    In other denominations, Fridays in Lent are meat-free. No steak or burgers. No bacon. Oddly, due to the latin root “carno” (i.e., carnivore), fish isn’t a “meat”. So, fish Friday it is. If you’ve ever gone out to dinner on a Friday, there is always clam chowder. This originates from the Roman Catholic tradition of not have fish on any Friday. After Vatican II (a revision of the Roman Catholic ways), fish Friday became a thing only during Lent, like today. So, what’s for dinner, again?

    Why ask this? Did you know about the reasons why clam chowder on Fridays? Some geographic areas follow this same observation, but often don’t know why. It just is. There are a lot of “that’s the way it is.” Do we ever wonder why? Let’s unpack this together a little. Our supermarkets full of pork, beef, chicken, fish are an historical anomaly. Sheep, goats, beef (okay, not pork for Israelites) were not part of the normal diet. Such meat was eaten as either part of the sacrifice (hence the deep sin of Eli’s sons) or a celebration. Both of these events have a deep tie to worship and thanksgiving to God. While in the early church, eating such meats (beef, sheep, goat, etc.) was still not a regular practice, it was decided that to honor Good Friday throughout the year, meat (i.e., flesh) was not eaten in honor of God (Jesus) who died in the flesh.

    How we approach Fridays in Lent, Good Friday, Easter, 4th of July, Thanksgiving, Christmas is very important. Even secular holidays are important in how we observe them. As Christianity fades from our culture, Lent, Good Friday, Easter, Christmas, and other Christian observances, how we mindfully observe them becomes critical, for it becomes our witness. How the culture raises other observances into almost a sacramental view is important for us to understand. It is because something is missing.

    When the Reubenites, Gadites, and half the tribe of Manasseh built their alter it was a sort-of good thing. It was a hedge against being forbidden from worshipping at the Tabernacle. That sounds smart until you think through the heart. They didn’t trust their fellow Israelites. For some reason, there was already an emotional barrier in place. The heart of worship is supposed to be God. The sacrifice is an act to remind us of God’s grace. When a culture raises things to the point of God-relational act (such as sacrifice or worship), it becomes a secular holy thing. It wasn’t that long ago, that the Super Bowl was the event of the year. Yet, because it really isn’t important (sorry, football fans), it loses its shine. Something else will replace it. When the Reubenites, Gadites, and half the tribe of Manasseh build this altar they effectively declared that the altar defined their relationship with God. They even put it in God-honoring language that the remaining Israelites bought into.

    So, what does this have to do with dinner? There are many things (habits and traditions) we do that we are not even aware of, or are so accustomed to that to not do them seems wrong. To most of us, fish Friday is not a religious act of devotion, yet it remains one for others. Eli’s sons didn’t care about the sacrifice, but more about the choice food. The Reubenites, Gadites, and half the tribe of Manasseh built an altar that their descendants became entrapped and confused (in regards to worshipping and relating to God). As we approach a discussion of sacraments and legacy, sometimes our legacy can be false sacraments we left behind.

    1) Think of a normal worship service (whichever you attend). What’s one thing, that if removed, would keep you from feeling as if you were truly worshipping God?

    2) Spiritual Disciplines often can become actions we do, but have no life. What spiritual disciplines do you practice? How do they give you life?

    3) If you chose to abstain from something during Lent, have you been consistent? If not, why not? If so, have you experienced and changes or had significant reflections?