Devotion.al

Tag: community

  • Back To The Dark

    2 Chronicles 24:17–22, Matthew 10:17–22, Acts 6:8–15, Acts 7:51–59 (read online ⧉)

    Yesterday was only Christmas and here we are back into the darkness of the world. How true to that is. A baby is born and a family feels joy. In the midst of that joy, there are concerns about food, shelter, . There can even be future concerns such as disease or college. While a new life begins, other lives continue. In some respects, it is dishonest to always talk about the baby, because everyone else is just as important. When we are talking about Jesus, things are a little different, but the reality is that Mary and Joseph still had their lives to deal with. For example, the whole reason they were in Bethlehem was to be registered. Once they were registered, the Roman government was going to tax them accordingly. Sounds great, doesn’t it? It does sound like real life. That doesn’t mean we have to enjoy the darkness, nor does it mean we have to accept it as inevitable. It is however reality.

    Joash had been a good king with a singularly great and God-honoring advisor, Chief Priest Jehoida. Despite Joash’s obedience and Jehoida’s piety, the followers of other gods jumped into an advisory role with Jehoida’s death. As with much of Scripture, we don’t have the entire story. There was likely family and politics in the midst of it. There was also some hopeful and blind optimism which lead to thinking that all would be well. It wasn’t. Who knows how quickly Judah fell back into apostasy: days, months, years. God sent prophets to guide the people (especially the king) back to the right road, but they all failed. That God sent Zechariah—who would have likely had a significant place in Joash’s life—as a prophet tells us how serious God was. Joash, for whatever reason, sealed his apostasy and the fate of Judah by stoning him at the temple of God. The that was to be used upon those opposed to God was instead used by them against a man of God.

    Jesus knowing his future and knowing the past history of Judah wasn’t really predicting much. If Jesus’ disciples were , they would be persecuted. When Jesus talks about the fracturing of the family perhaps he had in mind Jehoida, Joash, and Zechariah, who were (from our ) framily. At least, they should have been, and that is what the Scriptures guide us to concluding. The framily of king and prophet that should have been , were divided and ultimately destroyed.

    Not too much later, Stephen was killed. As he was in his community, it is possible that some of those who stoned him had been Jewish friends or family. For what was he brought to trial? Performing signs and winning arguments. So, he was falsely accused of blasphemy. Why was he killed? Because he claimed to see Jesus sitting at the right hand of God. The right and wrong lines between Joash and Zechariah are much firmer and better defined than those between Stephen and his accusers. We know that the Jewish (especially at that time) understanding of what it meant to follow God was wrong. However, unlike Joash they were not advocating for a different God. It was an understanding of God that was the issue.

    This difference of understanding applies to us today. The Western church is going through a series of upheavals. Sadly, the world watches and laughs. These upheavals are necessary, though. The church needs to discover (in some cases) and rediscover (in other ones) what it means to be a in a non-Christian world. Much of these upheavals will allow us to understand ourselves better. The reason this is critical for the church is that we will be returning to the times of persecution in the Western world. No, we are not quite there, but it will come. The church needs to be , and a lot of being ready will require the shedding of a lot of ancient weight. It also will probably require us to pick-up ancient ways long discarded. Lastly, it will require us to learn a new language with which to share the . The message doesn’t , just the method and the language.

    1) Do you think Joseph and Mary were concerned the day after Jesus’ birth, or were they still enjoying the moment? Why?

    2) Today’s passages are actually historical church decision (i.e., the lectionary). Why do you think the observation of Stephen’s martyrdom follows Christmas Day?

    3) Family and framily squabbles and fights are usually the ones that hurt the most. Why is that? How does impact the Gospel?

  • Broken Family; Broken Community

    Genesis 38:1–30, Deuteronomy 25:5–10, Ruth 4:1–10, Mark 12:18–27

    Migration has long been the story of humankind. People would from place to place. The States mythos includes a strong migratory component, from the theorized migration of First Nations peoples over the Bearing Land Bridge to the European migration to the Western Expansion, along with 2 Gold Rushes and the huge population shifts with the Great Depression and World War II. This creates a strong cultural influence on family dynamics and in the wider society. The Census Bureau estimates that from 2013-2017, 41.5% of the US population did not live in the same state (or country for foreign-born) as they were born in. How can this not impact our with people, family, and place?

    Until the last 70 years, or so, when people moved from a different country to the US or even state-to-state, the family ties were broken or became perfunctory rather than profound. If you are one of those that have remained in the same state you were born in, it is still likely that your parents, or grandparents came from. Advances in transportation have allowed for some of these familial ties, but this is more likely for middle- and upper-class people. With the of more and more connective technologies, there is greater potential to maintain these connections. It is too soon to tell if that will actually happen, though based on current evidence it doesn’t look likely.

    What does all of this have to do with our passages? They show a huge difference between ancient cultures and our own. That is part of the problem. In the first 3 passages from the Old Testament, the significance of the “kinsman ” (an epithet we get from the book of Ruth) is lost in today’s culture. Put your siblings or your children into these stories as either kinsman redeemer or needing such, and gauge your responses. Most people have a negative response to it. We generally don’t get it. Many centuries later, this is still a question, as we can see with Sadducees’ question of .

    Connections. . Obligation. Sense of place. This should help us understand why we have such a problem with ekklēsia (ἐκκλησία). This Greek is often translated as “church”. It originally meant a public gathering. Through the resilience of God’s Word, church as a gathered community became the dominant definition. Community.

    In many respects, the church became more of the ekklēsia during the Westward Expansion, as it was the only common gathering place. However, as transportation “improved” and the suburbs became a reality, community began to fade. Now, in the Pacific Northwest, even the ekklēsia isn’t really a community. In many churches, and some say ours, many people do not feel that they are part of the community. For some, the ekklēsia is a fancy word for an hour-long meeting on Sunday, that doesn’t really feed into the other 6 days of the week.

    1. What do you do to build community? To build community, do you think you should look to yourself, first? Or do you need to look to ?
    2. If you were to describe your ideal church community, what words would you use? If you were to describe your ideal community where you live, what words would you use? How are the words and intent both the same and different?

  • From the Heart

    Colossians 3:12–17

    οἰκτιρμοῦ (oiktirmou) :: mercy and concern with sensitivity and compassion

    χρηστότητα (chrēstotēta) :: giving to or providing for a person as an of

    ταπεινοφροσύνην (tapeinophrosynē) :: humble attitude and without arrogance

    πραΰτητα (prautēta) :: of attitude and behavior / not harsh with

    μακροθυμίαν (makrothymian) :: emotional despite provocation or misfortune, and without complaint or irritation.

    So, why the Greek lesson? English misses so much. The one that triggered this particular Greek lesson is οἰκτιρμοῦ (oiktirmou). In the most used translations, this is only translated as compassion. A few translations (e.g., HCSB, ESV, and NASB) add heart in some form. This is an important qualifier.

    Compassion can be an act of obedience (with or without being a loving ). For many people, that is exactly what it is. Almsgiving (giving and/or aid to the poor) is common in a number of religions. It is, for example, 1 of the 5 pillars of Islam (called Zakat). In the , it is titled Compassionate Ministries (Church of the Nazarene organization). It is Blue Bucket Sundays at Generations Community Church. People out of obligation, too. It’s not that obedience or obligation is bad, but what about the heart.

    Think of χρηστότητα (chrēstotēta). Giving to give is fine, sort of. If we were to give a poor family the best birthday party for the youngest child or feed the family for the month (and, based on the bills of some birthday parties, that isn’t a stretch), which would we choose? Both are giving as kindness, but which has the potential for the greatest kindness.

    Why is this important? It’s about our lives with one another. Our lives with one another are to exemplify love…and compassion of the heart.

    1)Taking the rest of the Greek, how do they each apply to your walk, whether for yourself or for others?

    2) In Churches, compassion is often the mission of a ministry. That is not how we are called to live. How can you deepen the compassion in your Christian walk? How can you help others to deepen theirs?

  • Thriving Together

    Exodus 22:21–27, 1 Timothy 5:3–16, 2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

    “God only helps those who help themselves.” This is one of those statements that should be considered a swear phrase in the . This statement has been misused and people have been abused with it.

    Truly, if we put this to the extreme test we can definitely prove this false. No baby changes or feeds themselves. No child learns reading, writing, math (and so on) in a vacuum. With very rare exception (so rare as it shouldn’t even be counted), no one comes to saving in Christ without another.

    In Exodus, the concept of widows, orphans, and aliens is really those who have no connections/relations to aid them. We have to remember, most of the “safety nets” that the US and other countries have in place are because the family safety net is mostly destroyed. In ancient Israel, without family, you were truly on your own. While the had directions to create a space for widows, orphans, and aliens to live on the scraps, that was never the heart’s desire. When we are in right relationship with God and others, we should be thriving, not surviving.

    This concept is supported in ‘s letter to Timothy. It is the family’s responsibility to provide for all members of the family, even the ones they don’t like. What is interesting is the number of requirements to be for a widow to be on the list: 60+, one husband, good “works” (i.e., lived well with positive contributions, no matter how small, to the larger ), and the implied not idle (contrasting to the younger widows).

    It is the idleness that probably led to the quote on the outset. We have all experienced those who have not to work. You might even know people who have been “trained” to not work. That is a sign of brokenness. God wired us to work. That’s even why we have the , for far too many “work”, even when they are relaxing.

    Yet, there is a particular tendency that often comes with idleness that Paul is really against; this is meddling. Meddling, in this context, is more of being a busybody, or digging into or sharing others’ lives in ways that do not build up another. There are those who just cannot help themselves not be involved in others’ lives.

    The other piece of the opening quote are those we are called to help. There is a call on us to help those who cannot help themselves. What “cannot” entails is where the nuance takes place. There are those that will not, must not, can not, and don’t know how or where to start. There is one other category of this, it’s those who do not understand. Some of these are those that take advantage of the hearts of others. However, we cannot judge all by some.

    1. Have you ever used the opening quote? Why? What was your intent?
    2. Have you ever heard the opening quote used against those who are trying hard, or against yourself? How did that make you feel? What the usage of the quote justified? What do you think the users intent was?
    3. We often have litmus tests for those we help. Paul did. What are yours? Why those?

  • Sacrifice of Living

    Isaiah 1:10–18, Psalm 50, Romans 5:20–6:11

    The problem with the Law was the ability to think out the payment schedule, particularly the wealthy. What the wealthy did, it seems, was to commit the sin, then pay the penalty. In other words, the payment for the sin was considered as part of the “cost of doing business.” Part of the point of the law was to show the cost of sin in a way that was significant. However, in the midst of great wealth, everything became distorted.

    While we could draw some parallels to the modern day when it comes to extreme wealth, it is the other aspects of this which should give us pause. As we read the passage from Isaiah, it is not just the rich who are at fault. While they may have led the vanguard, the followed. There appears to be a universal condemnation of the population of Israel.

    It would seem, on the outset, that the Psalm is a little different. Yet, God seems to disregard the offerings as pointless. That’s really not much better. The reality is, as the Psalm continues, the Israelites are truly lost, wandering away from God. They are not in community with one another. The reality is that sometimes we all do not live well in community. Yet, we try…mostly.

    One of the deepest truths is that we all fail to live perfectly in community. Sometimes we disguise it behind pithy statements such as, “a is a hospital; we’re all wounded.” There is in the words, but there is also a strong tendency to categorize the wounds we have inflicted as, “just a sad reality.” This is not the way to live!

    Yes, absolutely, we will wound people and will be wounded by people. We are not, however, supposed to leave it like that. Yes! Grace abounds. We are supposed to give it to one another! Yes! God heals. God often heals through others. Being dead to sin is not doing “the right” , it is living to give , , , and grace.

    1) Who have you wounded recently? How will you respond when someone comes to you saying that you wounded them?

    2) Who has wounded you recently? How will you approach them? How will you show them grace?*

    3) What is the difference between grace and forgiveness?

    *In certain situations regarding , emotional, or spiritual abuse, this is not being blind to the others’ behavior. Never put yourself in harm’s way.

  • Choosing Sabbath

    Nehemiah 13:19–22, Isaiah 56:4–7, Mark 2:27–28, Hebrews 4:9–11

    We really are bad at taking a . Even in the “good old days” restaurants would be filled on Sundays with people leaving and eating. So now we have memes that say, “consciously choosing to slow down and rest is a revolutionary of self-care.”

    Obviously, this is not a new thing. Nehemiah “defended” the Sabbath by force of arms. Imagine armed guards walking around making sure you rested. It sounds a little strange. Nehemiah understood that the first step to prevent violation of the Sabbath was removing …the merchants.

    God always wanted the Sabbath to be followed. So much so that the Sabbath became a doorway into a with God for those where were previously excluded from the …eunuchs and foreigners. In many ways, right observance of the Sabbath overrode the other “ritually clean” and “ exclusionary” practices.

    Sabbath observance was never about the rules, says , it was for us. Yet, we don’t seem to really get it. One of the biggest pieces of the Sabbath is not rest, or at least not rest in the way we think of it. The writer of Hebrews gives us the insight that really helps us understand the Sabbath. The author of Hebrews tries to get us to the point that we understand that full/true Sabbath rest is when we rest within the embrace and of God and are fully present.

    1) On Sunday, the “standard” Sabbath, we often are still busy. Are you finding your rest withing the embrace and presence of God, and are fully present with God?

    2) What ways do you fill your Sundays (or Sabbath day, if not Sunday) with activities? Are they restful in God, or are they mere restful for your body, or are they even restful?

  • At The Threshold

    2 Chronicles 8:14–16, Mark 13:32–37

    Have you ever been to a fancy hotel or apartment building, and seen (or interacted with) the doorman? In a way, they as a guard, granted a more passive one, yet their often acts as a mental barrier to entry.

    In the times of the , the gate-keepers protected the offerings and the offering storerooms next to the entrances (the gates). By their presence, they also maintained a sense of order (crowd control).

    As time progressed, the wealthy would have doorkeepers. They only let the “right” people into the house. The concept evolved to the doorman, which may be more familiar now.

    There is also a different type of doorkeeper, and that was the herald who would announce the guests at noble functions during the middle ages (even up to today). This function permits even new nobility to some traction, as a little of the awkward greeting time is gone. Also, with the announcement is the titles that go along with names. Especially in the nobility, titles were often more important than names, as there were certain nobility one was not to approach without the proper invitation.

    warns that the doorkeeper must remain awake. None of us can be perpetually awake, no matter how much caffeine. Eventually, our minds and bodies shut down. What if, however, the doorkeeper that guards is also the doorkeeper that welcomes. What if, the doorkeeper that welcomes, also announces.

    Over that last few years, Generations has been working on that exact concept through the Welcome Team. Why are we talking about the Welcome Team? They are the doorkeepers. Their presence can be intimidating (despite the warm smiles, warm words, and, hopefully, warm hands) to a guest. That’s true for many people. What if we had the Greeters announce (loudly) the names (and titles) of our guests? That would (after the awkward yell) break some ice. We’d already know their names (granted, we’d have to be paying attention to those outside our little circles). It would be easier to greet them.

    The reality is that gatekeepers, doorkeepers, doormen, and greeters are people at the transition. Where they stand is the transition from outside to inside.

    1) How do you welcome people into your home?

    2) A common practice today in our homes is to “come on in. The door’s open.” What are the positives of that? What are the negatives (minus security)?

    3) At church, it may seem to be someone else’s responsibility to welcome people. If you’ve been a guest at someone’s house, how does it feel to only have 1 person greet/acknowledge you, while the ignore you?

  • Deep Water Religion

    Matthew 21:23–27, 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12

    Religious figureheads are often accused (too often, correctly) of seeking their own , whether by influence or . Even those with no background see a problem with it. Truthfully, it is not just Christianity that has this struggle, not by far. As Christianity is the culturally “dominant” (though how dominant it truly has been is questionable), we generally see more of the Christian-flavored versions.

    What makes a religious figurehead true or false is a good question to have. The chief priests and elders weighed the cost of their answer. In their case, it was a matter of influence and . They chose what they thought was the safe (or unanswerable) . Yet, had a response for them. Their attempt to be safe did cost them, after all, though not for long.

    The ability of the American people to retain the collective antagonism toward religious figures was also played out in ‘s letter to the Thessalonians. Apparently there were some (likely outside of the Thessalonian Christian community) that were actively trying to discredit Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy. Somehow the mess at Philippi continued to (unjustly) follow them, which was being used to discredit them. They were being accused of being into evangelism and church leadership for the money (or for free room and board). It is actually the flattering speech that has caused many churches and leaders to fall.

    When hardships come (which they do) flattering speech does not produce deeply rooted disciples. It actually can create a mob of people who feel betrayed and will go after those that “hurt” them. As Christians, it is our responsibility to beyond the shallows of and move to deep waters. The deep waters are scary, yet if we well anchored in our faith, we will not go—nor be lead—astray.

    1) Who are some people (not necessarily religious ones) that with flattering speech? Why do they do it? If they are successful in speaking that way, why do you think that is?

    2) In this day and age, business leaders and politicians seem more likely to greedy motives. What is the attraction to their many followers, do you think?