Devotion.al

Tag: Easter

  • Such Saving

    John 6:40-44, 1 John 5:13-21

    ‘ words in John can be limiting if we let them be. For example, if we were too literal in seeing or not seeing Jesus (John 6:40), most of us would not have much hope for . There are many who have visions and dreams of Jesus, they might count. This one of those language problems. The Greek lends itself to beholding and experiencing. This is not to take away the responsibility of physically seeing Jesus, but to add onto it.

    This does lead well into the next slight challenge of verse 44. From the Wesleyan point of view, God did the calling (prevenient grace), we do the responding/accepting. Why is this a challenge? Many would (have and do) argue this means we have no role in this business. Yet, while God acts first, God gives us the and ability to choose to accept.

    However, this does help us with the first phrase, for when God calls us and we , we are able to see Jesus for who he is…our savior.

    That “” provides us the assurance that we have eternal life. Yet, the world is constant calling us back to it, and away from God. When we are as fellow believers, we are able to intelligently, understandingly, and compassionately pray for our brothers and sisters in Christ. As John points out in his letter, God hears us when we pray according to his will. God’s will is that not should be lost.

    1) What is your reaction to knowing that you have a part () in your salvation?

    2) Why do you think it is important to understand that God did the saving before you did the responding?

    3) The sin that leads to is ominous. What do you think that might be?

  • Being Someone for Someone

    Daniel 5:1–31, Isaiah 6:1–10

    Belshazzar didn’t from the stories of Nebuchadnezzer.

    Yesterday, we read about how Nebuchadnezzer didn’t really seem to learn the lessons that were in front of his face. On the other hand, there seem to have been a few things that he respected, one of them being the things from God’s . It is very interesting to recognize that. As the story of the unfolds, we learn that Nebuchadnezzer had an itemized inventory of the items from the temple. In his own (wrong) way he honored the God of the people he had captured.

    Belshazzar learned nothing, and understood nothing. Nor, does it seem, that he cared. Some scholars have declared the story of Belshazzar to be a fictional tale due to a couple of issues. The first is being King. He wasn’t. His was by sitting in the royal seat, but his father was not a descendant of Nebuchadnezzer. Except, melek [meh·lek] is also used as royal. Belshazzar was also the guy-in-charge when dad left. So, “King” perhaps not, but Belshazzar’s behavior does remind me of an unruly spoiled child who threw a party when the parents were out. Another poke at the story, is that Nebuchadnezzer was called Belshazzar’s father. Yet, if you read other parts of the Old Testament, this isn’t necessarily a genetic parent statement, but a statement of a lineage of . Regardless, though, Belshazzar messed up, and a big disembodied hand came and wrote on the wall.

    Belshazzar is not unique to the world, or to scripture. Far too many people dismiss God, because they cannot perceive God, they think. Instead, like Belshazzar and his courtiers, they gods of metals, whether it be homes, cars, gold, phones, computers, etc.
    Isaiah provides the counterpoint to such. While he had a mystical experience, his was already pre-oriented to God. Visions such as he had could be understood because of that. On the other hand, people who turn away from God have an experience and no transformation.

    1) There are plenty of people like Belshazzar in the world. Will you be a Daniel to them?

    2) There are plenty of people like Belshazzar in the world. Will you be Isaiah for them?

    3) There are plenty of people like Belshazzar in the world. Will you be to them?

  • Pedestals

    Daniel 4:28–37, John 6:25-35

    Nebuchadnezzar is an interesting study in , belief, unbelief, wrong belief, and pride. Nebuchadnezzar had been confronted by God’s might, majesty, and power multiple times during his reign. One would have thought that he might have learned something. However, Nebuchadnezzar seemed to have to multiple times. As Nebuchadnezzar’s story ends at the of chapter 4, it would be nice to conclude that Nebuchadnezzar learned. However, the Bible doesn’t say, and history (including even the history in Daniel) would imply that he didn’t.
    Nebuchadnezzar was in the middle of a culture with many Gods. As much as he was in power, he would have still had to consider the faith of the populace. Turning over their would not have gone well, and would have likely caused unrest. Other jealous and powerful people would have leveraged the unrest and potentially created a rebellion.

    We can see similar tensions in our own . It has only been in the last few years that politicians feel that it is culturally acceptable to not say they are a . While there is a balance of power in our system, it wasn’t that long ago that politicians either toed the “Christian” line (of at least saying they were Christian) or did not succeed (by and large).

    Often in Nebuchadnezzar’s era, kings were what were perceived has making the country flourish, be bountiful, and be powerful. They were put on pedestals they hadn’t earned. Often they become proud. God made sure that Nebuchadnezzar’s pride took a hit.

    Sometimes God-fearing people get put on a pedestal, too. In this passage in John, has to correct the people that it was God the who gave the manna, not Moses. Imagine that! People had become confused enough that they thought a man completed and of God (and for 40 years, at that).

    From what we know about Moses, he would not have accepted any part of God’s . He often took a reconciling role between God and the people. By the time of Jesus, Moses had become a great mythical godlike super-man. Moses would not have been pleased.

    1) Why do we have a tendency to esteem people beyond their roles and capabilities (i.e., put on a pedestal)?

    2) How does putting a person on a pedestal endanger that person?

    3) How does putting a person on a pedestal endanger our personal and spiritual growth?

  • Checkmarks and Tasks

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

    The in Galatia was struggling. Someone was pouring bad ideas and thoughts into them, causing them to walk away from the 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 (, 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 .

    Last week, Rachel Held Evans died at the age of 37. She was a progressive 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 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 and . 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 in their faith.

    1) Growth and challenge. Why is it that when we are challenged, we grow? How how you see in work, , 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 of 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 . When we look in the mirror and think even more so. Holiness has often been twisted to be 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 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’ 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 . 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 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 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 . 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?

  • Perfect Perfectionism

    Matthew 5:43–48, 2 Corinthians 12:1–10

    Perfection. There are many well-meaning people that say perfection is the of progress, profit, completion, excellence, or that perfection is the disease of a or a disguise of insecurity. Generally, however, it is not perfection that is the issue but perfectionism. This is where all the energy to accomplish something is put into making sure that it is perfect. Sorry, we’re . Perfectionism needs to die. Perfection, on the other hand, needs to be lifted up.

    When talks about being perfect like the our Heavenly is perfect, it is the goal, in the same way that it is the goal to be perfect parent. It is the goal, not that we will ever achieve it on this side of . There is the reality that you cannot hit what you are not aiming at, and balancing that against being too overwhelmed at not hitting the mark.

    Perfectionism, a trap that many people (Christian and not) fall into. Perfectionism is a performance evaluation, and often not a very good one. Perfectionism can also be the trap (or escape) keeping you from even trying in the first place (i.e., “It won’t be perfect, so why try.”).

    In the context of Jesus’ words, that perfection is lived out in love.

    ‘s understanding of perfect seems to be slightly different, and it is. Perfection (God’s being made perfect in ) has more the meaning of being fully expressed. How is God’s power being fully expressed in God’s weakness? Paul’ humbling due to the thorn. What the thorn actually is doesn’t really matter. The thorn forces Paul to be a lot more humble in his behavior (according to him). He brags about someone else and not himself.

    This is an aspect of Jesus’ “be perfect” in that Paul is loving (by building up) this other person, and also loving in his humble yet firm approach with the Corinthians. There isn’t a dictatorial admonishment here, but the loving reproach of a father to his children. Did Paul “perfectly” live out live, probably not. Did he strive to? Absolutely.

    1) What is your “gut” response to Jesus’ to be perfect? Why?

    2) What is your “gut” response to God’s power being made perfect through Paul’s affliction? Why?

    3) Do you see a difference between perfection and perfectionism? What are the similarities? Why do you think these two terms get confused?

  • Inherting Legacy

    Genesis 47:18–26, Acts 4:34–5:11

    In the United States, land has long represented , self-reliance, , 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 . It also is a symbol of . It can also represent 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 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 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 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’ 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 , 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?

  • Fire Is Best

    Psalm 66, Revelation 3:14-22

    You may not be aware of how the metal you are using comes to be. Most metals are dug up in an unusable form. They have to be made usable. There are three primary methods to get the raw material to be more like the goal: mechanical (e.g., crushing), chemical (i.e., acid), and temperature (i.e., ). Each of these is used for different metals, and also depends on what the goal of the metal is. If, for example, you are going to throw it in to mix with a bunch of melted stuff (i.e., not looking for purity), you would use chemicals to break down the bonds. If you just need raw material, you might just smash it until it’s as small as you want (it won’t stick very well, though).

    For purity and cohesion, fire is best. The metal your car is made from (at least some of it) was melted in a huge vat and became molten. Stuff will be added in known quantities to get the end properties desired, such as strong steel. Most gold that is worn is a gold alloy, where gold has stuff added to make it stronger without affecting its beauty. Gold is valued, primarily, because people value it (a circular argument, for sure). It is easily shaped for decorations (and people like to adorn themselves with it). It was used for (can still be). In our day and , its greatest value is not jewelry, but electronics. It is a fantastic conductor. Not enough is used in your electronics to try to get it, however, it does improve the abilities of electronics to do their tasks using less electricity. Gold, even in the days of diamonds and platinum, is still the primary precious metal, and it was the best known precious metal in ‘ and Paul’s day.

    Due to that, gold (along with silver, the second most valued metal) were a good subject lesson in regards to people. In the letter to Laodicea, Jesus talks about the Laodiceans blindness to their own poverty. Jesus is speaking spiritually. The church of Laodicea is lacking in spiritual growth. The Laodiceans think they have it all together and are good to go. Yet, they are lacking. How often are we like they were? Thinking in all our blessings that we have it all together. There are false teachers who teach exactly that. Laodicea is our object lesson that this isn’t so. Laodicea was a wealthy city, but the church was spiritually poor. Laodicea was the home of a medical school known for an eye-balm, yet they were blind. Laodicea was also known for its cloth, yet they were naked.

    They needed to be refined. They had no money to buy the refined gold (cleansing and ). God would sell it to them anyway. With that gold, they could buy True eye-balm to see their real spiritual state. With that gold, they could buy the clothes that would cover their True nakedness. In other words, God’s got it covered…if they . Then we get to the hard part, to receive all of that (which they thought they already had), they had to be rebuked and disciplined (i.e., refined).

    1) Have you have thought you had it all together in your life, and then everything came crashing down? How about spiritually? How was your different between the two events?

    2) Why are rebuke and part of the refining process? What other words would you use?

    3) It is reasonable to look at ourselves as the “raw material” that God refines. Where do you think God used each of the three methods (mechanical, chemical, temperature) to refine you?