Tag: Epiphany

Life Giving God
Isaiah 46:1–13

Much of the Scriptures tells Truth through visual stories. Sometimes that imagery is disconcerting. It can also be mind-altering.

Many of us struggle with some of that imagery. Being the bride of Christ can seem odd. Or there is the thought of being the clay pot.

Most of us are very familiar with God as Father (in particular, God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit). So, when it comes to this passage in Isaiah it could be jarring. If you read this passage in the NIV, it won’t seem so, but most of the other translations have God being pregnant.

Yes, God is pregnant. Of course, it is an image. Yet, it is an important one.

One of the great mysteries (and, as a guy, great honors) that women have is the ability to bear children (definitely not saying pregnancy is easy). With God as Creator, perhaps we should be surprised that God isn’t identified more often this way.

The imagery in the context of this passage is critical. The comparison is between God (life-bearer) and idols (no life in them).

God addresses the reality that the Israelites have “treasured” their idols, and that they put so much value upon them. They put their hope to escape the surrounding powers. Instead, they are hauling their idols with them to exile. As the idols were often covered or made of precious metals and gems, the likelihood is that idols would be destroyed as part of the exile.

The idols that the Israelites made and worshiped so that they could maintain the lives they had…did nothing. The God they had abandoned promised to remain with them and to rescue them.

While carrying their empty, lifeless idols into captivity…God reached out. God said—in effect—I am here to carry you…and give you life.

※Reflection※
- What other symbols (i.e., pregnancy) can you associate with the life-giving aspect of God?
- What modern idols do people believe “give life”? How do they mimic life?
※Prayer※

God, thank you for your life-giving nature. May we embrace all that it means. Amen.
2021-02-05
Wages of Worth

1 Corinthians 9:1–16

Wages are not a small thing. There have been a number of studies that for the same position and experience women make less than men, and minorities make less than whites. The results of such studies can be quite disheartening.

Numbers can be deliberately misinterpreted or mishandled or presented in a deceiving fashion. Numbers don’t lie. People do.

If numbers were to portray the value of people, many of the remuneration studies would “say”: “white man” > “white woman” > “minority man” > “minority woman”. This is even the case in technical organizations that function in numbers and where skills and experience supposedly guide the way.

I have been in a position to know the pay of others. Some were paid more than others due to experience, skillset, and talent. Others were paid more than others because they came at a time where their skillset (even if normally inadequate) was needed (premium pay). To my knowledge, no one was paid differently because of their race or gender, but that part was never part of my purview.

Paul chided the Corinthians about their tight-fisted-ness. Based on previous verses, it is likely that people are maligning Paul either because he doesn’t take payment or because others were getting paid. As a bi-vocational pastor, I have been told I was (and have been treated as) not a “real” pastor because I wasn’t paid. I was also told that a “real” pastor wouldn’t be working a second job (even though that’s the one feeding my family).

To protect the innocent, I will say there once was a church with a pastor and his family (and this isn’t about me). They paid their pastor so poorly (and the church was in a wealthy community) that their pastor was on food stamps. In outrage, one of the board members successfully pushed a pay increase, putting the pastor over the food stamp eligibility. The only problem is that because of that, the pastor and his family went into a higher tax bracket, and he made less. The family was worse off. The board was fine with it, as the optics of their pastor on food stamps was removed.

These differences in the treatment of pastors (my experience and the innocent pastor) give me a good reason to look at Paul. This weird dichotomy of it’s bad that Paul isn’t paid to it’s bad these leaders are paid makes a person’s head hurt.

Paul’s biblically grounded response of, “Yes, I have earned the right to be paid; you have the obligation to pay me,” and then saying, “but I choose not to be paid so that I am not a burden to you,” is amazing. His defense of his fellow leaders, who were getting paid, displays a lack of jealousy or a sense of being where he belongs.

The whole situation might seem strange. However, as we look at our own society and culture, we can recognize similarities. “You get what you pay for,” would put Paul in question as he was “free”. “I can get a better orator or cheaper speaker here,” would put the other leaders’ wages in question. If we’re honest with ourselves, many businesses (we should that churches wouldn’t do this) can look at an employee and see which one costs more. If they have a family, they will naturally require a higher wage. A young unmarried person has nothing to tie them down (they might work more), so they can accept a lower wage.

We say that people are equal, but we often don’t treat them that way. Wages should not define a person, but we often treat them as the test of their worthiness. God forgive us.

2021-02-04
Walk Out Your Faith
Galatians 5:2–15

I’ve probably shared this before; forgive me. A number of years ago, I was in a bible study. In it was a woman who said, “I don’t believe in the God of the Old Testament, only the New One. Only the God of the New Testament is a God of Love.”

Our study leaders were not the most theologically conservative. Even so, they quickly (and gently) corrected her. Yet, I know many people like her who were raised with the “hellfire and brimstone” type of sermons and teachings which predominately used the Old Testament to cause people to be terrified of God.

The Jews of Paul’s time weren’t so much afraid of God as they were not following the rules. The rules were the source of fear alongside the religious leaders who instilled fear.

This same affliction has been part of the church for generations. People followed rules because they could “safely” belong following the rules. Of course, that does not mean they understood the rationale behind the rules, or believed it.

Rules can be good and beneficial. Having an understanding of eternal consequences of decisions is also good. When they become the religion or “proof”, they will often defy our relationship with God.

The biggest victim in that situation is grace. People like the woman in the story, or those who experienced hellfire & brimstone sermons often become unable to see God’s grace. That inability to see God’s grace then becomes the inability to see God’s love.

Paul’s words to the Galatians were to remind them that they had God’s grace. To put an exaggerated point on it, he was telling them that they traded a city of gold for a rotten turnip. They embraced the rotten turnip, and dumped the city of gold.

There is, of course, the danger of developing in such a way of living needing grace that the way of living leads you to slavery. However, willfully (or ignorantly) skipping out on grace may be far worse.

Being grace-filled is counter-cultural. It has been for quite some time. Being grace-filled is not being a doormat, it is giving people what they don’t deserve…God’s love.
Read the scriptures for this devotional on BibleGateway.com
- If you were asked to live out your faith in grace, what would that look like?
- How does living out grace work with those with whom you disagree?
- If you were to choose grace or rules, which would it be? Which does your life display?
※Prayer※

Lord, let your grace flow in, through, and out of us more and more. Amen.
2021-02-03
God and Relationships
1 Corinthians 7:25–40

God and Relationships is a pretty big topic. First of all, we have to set our starting point. God is a relational God. God created humanity in relationship with God.

The first human was Adam. One thing to keep in mind with Adam is that according to some translators and some Jewish traditions was without gender upon initial creation. It wasn’t until the “rib” was removed from Adam that the division of gender came about. This flies in the face of much of the Christian tradition, I understand, but it further emphasizes “two shall become one” and that it occurs (with the realm of Eden, before the fall) between man and woman.

This seeming aside is also important as God declared that it was not good for humanity to be alone. This is peculiar in that if God is in a relationship with them, then the human wasn’t alone. Even at the point of Eden (again, before the Fall), God understood (even created) the situation that a human would need human fellowship. It’s odd to say that God wasn’t enough, yet human history shows that there is something fundamentally different in human-to-human relationship versus human-to-God relationship.

Therefore, with all of this before us, there is a tension from the beginning of man and woman, their relationship with God, and their relationship with each other. The inherent need of humanity for relationship also extends, eventually, to fellow humans. God desires a relationship with humanity. Humanity needs relationship with humanity (even we strong introverts).

This may seem to be a lot of preamble. Human relationships are at the core of Paul’s message to the church.

We primarily focus on marriage because it is culturally (and often personally) significant. There is good reason to focus on it. There is also good reason to ignore it in these verses.

Paul makes it clear that while he is spiritually led regarding the church and the gospel (more at the end of these verses), he also has no clear direction from the Holy Spirit (at the beginning of the verses). This means that these verses, in particular, need to be viewed in context. Paul’s perspective is that Jesus would be returning shortly (days, weeks, months, maybe a year or so). Paul has an end-times view. Why, from Paul’s perspective, would you confuse the little remaining time in your life with that kind of intimate and focused human relationship?

Paul writes in 2 Timothy 3:16–17, “All Scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” When we take context into consideration, we must also keep this passage in mind.

Paul’s highest concern is the Corinthians’ (and our) relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Paul recognizes that often our human relationships hinder our relationship with God. This can be a result of trauma from childhood to the spouse who has changed (or us who changed). Even healthy relationships may distract or interfere with a relationship with God. An unhealthy relationship will hinder it even more.

Our relationships with fellow humans really do deeply affect our relationship with God. One could even go so far as to say that if your relationships with humans are broken, so is your relationship with God. Yep, that one stings.

※Reflection※
- What human relationships did you think of as being damaged? How might those relationships inhibit your relationship with God?
- What human relationships can you think of that are good or great? How might they inhibit your relationship with God?
※Prayer※

God, we often say you are first in our lives, but the human relationships in our lives sometimes say different. Grant us discernment, healing, and grace to make them be what is best regarding our relationship with you. Amen.
2021-02-01
What A Sight
Numbers 22:1–35

Moab feared Israel. Israel “just” had a military victory against major forces around Moab. Israel had marched around Moab and yet hadn’t done anything directly against Moab. Moab was deeply concerned that they were next.

According to Moses (in Deuteronomy 2:9), God had directed him to leave Moab alone. There is no record of “official” interaction between the Moabites and Israel, so it would seem that Moab’s fears were based on assumptions rather than experience. Which leads us to Balaam.

The King of Moab called upon Balaam to curse the Israelites. Accusing the Israelites of being, basically, locusts seems to be a case of hyperbole. Yet, there was unsurety in Moab. It’s safer to wipe out the “other” than to communicate with them.

At first, it seems that Balaam was a righteous God-follower. As we continue the story, it seems that perhaps it was not quite so. There is an implication that God condescends to Balaam going to prophesy on King Balak’s behalf. The “go” seems to be more along the lines of, “You can go. You’re going to anyway. So, I will use your human desires to bring glory to me (God).”

And then we come to the famous part of the story, which recently came up in a conversation. The entirety of the conversation was about a talking animal. Which I get it. None of us have had an animal speak to us in human speech.

While human speech is important, our dog communicates just fine: whines, stares, growls, barks, licks, gnaws, pounces on, and so forth. She generally is successful in communicating her needs without human speech. A human baby communicates. It’s usually the parents who get the subtle differences between, “I’m hungry” cry, and “my stomach hurts” cry.

We could blame children’s Sunday School for the emphasis on a talking beast of burden. The adults are just as nonplussed as the children, though. The talking animal wasn’t the point of the story, not even close.

The talking animal was more along the lines of, “Yes, you (Balaam) said you heard me (God), but you need to understand how important it is that you actually listen to me!”

In the church, preachers/pastors/teachers will often say something along the lines of, “Yes, this hard, but the Scriptures say…” Part of this is the reality that preachers/pastors/teachers don’t want to deliver hard truth. It’s hard, and we all want to be liked. In a community that respects the Word of God, that can work.

Balaam probably doesn’t have that particular protection. Like many people of power, and especially with the gods of that era and place, they thought with the right amount of money or right sacrifice they could “move” gods to do their will. God doesn’t work that way, and Balak would likely have little joy in being thwarted.

However, that talking donkey and then the vision of the sword-bearing angel? That imagery was probably quite strong in Balaam’s eyes and heart. Likely, it was that which gave him the strength to deliver the oracles for Israel despite Barak’s insistence on curses.

A vision/experience like that would give many of us the strength to face the world.

※Reflection※
- When you recall the talking donkey, what else do you recall? Do recall the rest of the story?
- Why is important, especially with stories like this, to understand that the Scriptures use imagery?
※Prayer※

Lord, may we have the strength of your vision as we navigate the chaotic waters of this world. Amen.
2021-01-31
Heart of God, Speak

Deuteronomy 18:15–20; Mark 1:21–28

Prophetic speech is not unique to the Judeo-Christian community, not by a long shot. In the current world, there are many forms of prophetic voice.

A short list (i.e., not exhaustive) of prophetic voices: environmental collapse; sustainability (related, but not the same as environmental collapse); gender identification; minority redress (including, but not limited to, white privilege); economic growth; and so much more.

From a Judeo-Christian standpoint (and certainly from a number of political points within the church), it might seem dangerous to call these “prophetic.” The Global Wesleyan Dictionary of Theology says that prophecy is, “…an urgent message from God to an audience.”

That being said, the only similar words with the same underlying (i.e., surpassing the human condition) meaning are revelation (firmly culturally tied to Christianity), apocalypse (mostly having turned into meaning the fall of the modern world), oracle (too new-age-y even for many new-age-ers), and vision (which has too many meanings to be useful).

The reason this is important is that for many of these “prophetic” voices they are sharing the urgent message from their “god”. In some of these cases, it should be understood that we are not talking about gods as if they were God. We are talking about a world understanding framework that for Judeo-Christians we would think God. This means that faith is as much a part of their prophetic voice as God is part of ours.

On the other hand, there are many prophetic voices in these areas that are believers in and followers of Jesus Christ. For them, there is a direct tie between God, their voice, and the issue. As with many important human issues, it’s quite a mess.

The great sage, Ben Parker, once said, “With great power, comes great responsibility.” Christians have been given a unique power, that of the Holy Spirit. In combination with the Word of God (the Bible), we have the ability to influence others, and thus must be very careful in using what we have. This is especially true when used with other believers.

What has become also very evident is that people are disregarding prophetic voices that don’t agree with their line of thinking. This is the most dangerous. When we disregard the prophetic voices solely because they do not align themselves with our brand of Christianity (including denomination, political-alignment, lifestyle choices, or national origin), we are in grave danger of repeating the patterns of the Israelites…casting out the voices into the darkness, while condemning ourselves.

※Reflection※

What prophetic voices have you been hearing? What makes them prophetic? What, if any, change in your life have they prompted?

※Prayer※

Holy Spirit, you are living and active in this world right now. Give us the heart, wisdom, and discernment to hear the prophetic promptings of your people called by your name. Amen.

2021-01-30
Prophetic Testing

Deuteronomy 13:1–5

Prophetic words are very common in times of unrest. Much of the Old Testament are prophetic words during times of unrest. The times of unrest were because the people of Israel didn’t follow God. Since their focus was on the world, God became a bit player in their lives.

This should sound familiar. The last decade or so has had many “prophetic” words spoken. Most of the ones given attention were of the white evangelical variety.

Whether they were racist diatribes against Obama, misogynistic diatribes against Hillary Clinton, or (really) attempts at character assassinations of any so-called “liberal” leader, it was out-of-hand. It also shows how much the white evangelical church/culture was in “the hands” of a singular political party.

However, despite the “airplay” of much of this, there was just as much towards whichever “evil” Republican or “conservative” that was the focus of the day. It just wasn’t publicized.

Perhaps, someone reading this will say, “See, it’s because ‘they’ are biased!” That isn’t the issue for Christians. The real issue is that the church thinks that it is effective by walking hand-in-hand with earthly power.

The prophetic testing in this passage in Deuteronomy is interesting. One of the biggest tests of a prophet is, do their words come true? Another part of the test, do miracles happen? The church has done okay on the first, and not-so-good on the second.

It is the third test, however, that is the crucial one, does this draw us away from God?

By far, it isn’t solely an (US) American issue. It is an earthly powers issue, and the church is tempted around the world to succumb.

How’s this for a test? Does the person seek to make the “other” the enemy? Not their struggles, their opinion, even their sins…the person themselves.

If there really is an Imago Dei (the Image of God) in every human being, then is defining the “other” as “the enemy” is defining God as the enemy? This is how earthly politics work.

The third test, then, becomes does this “prophetic” word turn people against the Imago Dei?

Over the last 4 years, much attention and vitriol have poured out in the US (and then overflowed into the world). Most of it was based upon pain and fear (and here’s another test: did you say to yourself, yes, “their” pain and fear, and not acknowledge yours?).

Without question, there was a lot of Godly righteous anger. Without question, there was a lot of earthly self-righteous anger. Amid it all, there were Godly prophetic voices and earthly prophetic voices dressed in holy guise.

※Reflection※

What “voices” do you (really) listen to in your life? What is the spiritual background of those voices? What is the spiritual expression (how do they live out their lives, versus words) of these “voices”? Do the voices ever challenge your way(s) of thinking?

※Prayer※

God, forgive us for not actively listen for and to your voice. Forgive us for not testing the words of others against your Word. Amen.

2021-01-29
Promises of Grace

Psalm 111; Romans 9:6–18

Promises hold a significant place within the stories in the Scriptures. Much of this has to do with having to trust the fulfillment of a promise that people would not see.

Abraham is one such example. He was given a short (one year) promise as a “down payment” for the long term one. God had made large promises, and had definitely taken care of him, but the promise of not “just” a son of the woman he loved, but also countless descendents.

While Paul, understandably, focuses on Isaac, Ishmael is a different kind of promise. While Isaac is the promised line of love, God still promises Abraham that Ishmael will live and have descendents, too.

God didn’t have to make this commitment to Abraham, yet chose to. This speaks to God’s character. God understood that while Isaac was the “child of the promise”, Abraham still loved Ishmael and wanted him to do well and be well. Abraham, just as Paul, would not have questioned the wisdom of God’s will, neither would have Abraham.

Unquestionably, God’s commitment towards Ishmael reassured Abraham that he (Abraham) had made the right decision. Decisions are part of the struggle that the church has a problem with this passage. As has been preached on (at Generations) and addressed here in the devotionals, is that the ancient world understood God differently than we do.

Paul’s words prompt many to reflect upon God’s mightiness and glory. In the face of such, how could any person not believe, follow, and trust God? That’s Paul’s assumption. How could anyone not believe in God and God’s promises?

That same logic is carried forth to today within certain strains of Christianity. Those strains of Christianity, understandably, are of the same mindset as Paul. It’s not that they are wrong, per se, but as theology as aged and matured, the understanding of God’s grace has transformed thinking from the “chess player” God who chooses certain pieces to die or live to the guiding hand of God, which still allows humanity the ability to choose their path.

Jesus promised to be with disciples and us by extension. If God is as capricious as many modern theologians presume, then a promise from God is cold comfort. On the other hand, if God makes promises through guidance and love, then the comfort of a promise warms the soul.

2021-01-28
No Name
Proverbs 8:1–2; Mark 3:13–19

Many people have had nicknames growing up. Some of them were insulting. Some of them were just strange. Others were relating an individual to something else. Others were shortening of a proper name of the person.

“Captain” was sometimes used in my childhood (thank you, Star Trek). Ian is pretty hard to make a nickname out though (except with rhymes, which aren’t quite the same) . I was (to my face) spared nicknames. It probably also had to do with doing my best to blend in the background.

A new name was an ancient concept. Abram became Abraham. Jacob became Israel. Both received new names as they crossed a certain line of faith in and relationship with God.

Simon (Hebrew)/Peter (Greek) /Cephas (Aramaic) received a name. As near as we can tell, he was a passionate follower of Jesus. Would the comparison of Abraham or Israel apply? It didn’t seem so immediately. Upon the resurrection, though, it seems that Peter did indeed cross “the line”.

James and John were given a joint nickname. Their name has been hypothesized in many ways. My favorite is the easiest. Their father was a very LOUD man.

I shared an office with such a person. If he entered the office, I didn’t answer the phone or got off the phone, because it was hard to hear another person when this man talked in his normal tone. Imagine him yelling then (that happened…in the office…many times). That’s how I see Zebedee.

What does that tell us about James and John? They were probably loud, too. Maybe not quite to their dad’s level, but close enough! That’s my thought, anyway.

Have we forgotten the power of names? The Harry Potter series had a villain “who must not be named.” In the “world” of Harry Potter, names had power.

As a rule, Christians no longer write G-d, or Y-H, or something else. Many reverent Jews still will not write the name of God, or even the title. “Lord” is the translated euphemism for names of God.

Yet, in other ways, we recognize and abuse the power of names: Trump, Biden, Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative. Often names are used to quell dissension and discussion.

Other emblems of courtesy, such as “Mister, Missus, Miss, Ma’am, Sir” are falling into disuse. While these are titles, more than names, yet these too are power. That is actually part of the reason they have fallen into disuse. They grant power to others.

That is the odd thing about names. They provide power and identity for ourselves. They can also provide power to others. They can also destroy. Like many such things, the power to destroy is very easy.

The power to destroy seems to give us power. Yet, by tearing another person down, we often display the very weakness we are trying to hide.

※Reflection※
- Have you ever had or given a nickname? What was the reason behind it? What was the feeling behind it?
- Have you ever wanted to (or did) change your given name? Why?
- What name of yours defines you best?
※Prayer※

Jesus, the Name Above All Names, thank you for drawing us into your family. May we be worthy of your name. Amen.
2021-01-26
Trail Blaze
Psalm 46, Genesis 45:25–46:7

The King James Bible is arguably the single most significant book of the English language. Because of its centrality to the British Empire and the Church of England, the King James Bible had the unique placement to be the primary English language teaching and formation book for centuries, including all the colonies that the British Empire launched.

What people may not realize is that the King James Bible was the fourth English translation of the Bible. In fact, some of its language and interpretation is owed to the previous translations that were banned for a time. You might recognize the name of the predecessor translations: Tyndale, Wycliffe, Cloverdale.

It is those 3 English translations that are the real launching point for our visit with the Scriptures.

When we read this passage from Genesis, we are missing a few important pieces. First, the Hebrews had a long history with Egypt. Abraham and Isaac sojourned there for a time (also during famines). The one time Jacob was about to enter Egypt, God stopped him.

In a very unorthodox way, Joseph was sent before his father. Joseph’s faithfulness, integrity, and managerial skills allowed Joseph to be second only to Pharaoh. And, really, if you read that part of the story, it seems that even Pharaoh only kept a little power for appearances sake.

Now, however, Jacob was to go! God promised him as the God of his (Jacob’s) predecessors. This is God’s testimony to Jacob that God continues to be faithful to the first promise, and that this is part of the fulfilling of the promise. What is striking is that God uses the promise of many promises to echo the previous ones, making it all but assured. It only required that Jacob go.

Tyndale, Wycliffe, and Cloverdale were not universally loved for their translations. Part of the King James’ directive for the “Authorized” version was translating the scriptures so as to justify the Episcopate (Archbishops and bishop hierarchy of the Church of England) and the “Divine right” of kings. That’s pretty self-serving for the translation of Holy Scriptures. This would override some of what Tyndale, Wycliffe, and Cloverdale had done.

Tyndale, Wycliffe, and Cloverdale would have likely (mostly) supported the KJV because it did what they had wanted. It brought the Scriptures into the language that the people actually used. Despite the less than happy ending of their translations, it seems likely that without them going before, the importance of an English Bible would not have been seen or understood until much later.

Who went before us we may never know. We may never know who we went before.

It not for us to know. It is for us to trust.

※Reflection※

※Prayer※
- Who went before you?
- Who follows behind you?
2021-01-25