Devotion.al

Tag: faithful

  • Covenantal Bride

    Ezekiel 16:7–22, 2 Corinthians 11:1–4, Revelation 19:6–9

    The image of the church as the of was not a new concept. Israel/Judah was often compared to a wife, though, sadly, often an unfaithful wife. Despite the seeming graphic nature of this passage in Ezekiel, there is a strong implication of innocence, harking back to the Garden of Eden (prior to the Fall), when Adam and Eve were naked and unashamed. The bride (Israel/Judah) found in the wilds was innocent.

    Where it becomes interesting (and disturbing) is after the hinted marriage (covenant). Very quickly the bride wanders away all that she has to others that are not her husband. This motif of unfaithfulness covers much of the story in the Old Testament. The People—the bride of God—did not remain faithful to the one who chose them.

    Despite this being the central theme of the Old Testament, it is not as if God gave up. uses the imagery of a virgin (i.e., innocent) bride being presented to Jesus (God). It is not insignificant that Paul perceived the need to use this imagery. Despite the unfaithfulness to God in the Old Testament and the unfaithfulness to God (Jesus) in the New Testament, there is something significant in this marriage motif.

    Despite the altered state of marriage in our day and in a myriad of ways, marriage is still very much part of God’s plan for us. While we, the “church”, usually focus on marriage as a societal, cultural, and religious piece, for God it is something far deeper. Paul uses the marriage imagery in a culture that does not, generally, view it as covenant. It is contractual. Yet, Paul maintains its covenant view, even apologizing for being /silly. Imagine trying to convey the depth of the covenantal nature of marriage to people who don’t in it.

    Paul wants the Corinthians (and us) to not view our relationship with Jesus as transactional, but relational and covenantal. This covenantal view means that Jesus is at the center and core of the relationship, not just with God, but with others.

    Both Paul (2 Corinthians) and John (Revelation) view the bride as being prepared. Of course, in Revelation, it is at the conclusion of it all. For Paul, it is the ever-present tension of a bride being ready to all (prepared) and getting ready to give all (preparing). The bride will always be getting more ready, to always be closer to perfection, even if it is at an inch at a time. The question is, does the bride think He is it?

    1) When you look at yourself, how do you see yourself prepared for and preparing for Jesus? How do you think the church is prepared and preparing for Jesus?

    2) How have you been transactional in your relationship with Jesus? How do you think the church has been transactional in its relationship with Jesus?

  • Blessings and Consequences

    Exodus 34:1–27, Ezekiel 18:1–32

    There are many instances in where and consequences appear to be related, but at the same time aren’t.

    Often times, especially for “simpler” crimes, we see only the person convicted, not the victims. And when we see the victims, we see the victim of the crime itself and not the “invisible” victims. The invisible victims? There are many. Often there are far more invisible victims than visible ones. This is not (in any way) intended to diminish the actual victims and their pains…not at all. It is to widen our understanding of consequences.

    When God appears to threaten families (whole lineages) with the sins of a forebear, it can seem to be too much. Of course, if one notices the blessings are for 1000 generations and the “” for only 4, there does seem to be an odd imbalance. How does it work when 1 generation is , and the next is faithless? Is it an equation of 1000-4=996? Then the next generation is faithful, and it is again 1000? Perhaps.

    On the other hand, there might be another thing going on here. We have to recall that is everything in the ancient world. The thought of the 1000 generations after you would have been a strong motivator to do right. Watching your children, grandchildren, and (if you live long) your great-grandchildren suffer the consequences of your wrongs would be a strong deterrent.

    This is why understanding who the invisible victims of crime are is so important. The children of the criminal are often deeply affected (for life). The children of victims are deeply affected. The extended families of both perpetrator and victim suffer. It may be in small ways, but the smallest thing can turn a heart to good or bad.

    The consequences of the sins are carried on. There is a reason why (especially) negative traits (e.g., alcoholism, abuse) are passed down in families. The offender (e.g., the alcoholic or abuser) may have repented, but the damage has been done and usually gets passed down. That is reality.

    That there has to be a clarification of this tells us that there had been some sort of abuse. Whether it was “just” the saying, or if there was something that was far deeper, pervasive, and (or sinful) is up for interpretation. That God saw it as necessary to clarify would seem to indicate a strong spiritual problem that needed to be addressed.

    With these 2 passages, we see guilt and consequences. People may incur guilt with God and . They can , seek forgiveness, and receive it. The consequences, however, remain. The guilt is ours. The consequences are not. When we , it may seem it affects only us, but we may never fully understand the consequences our sins have for others.

    1) What does it mean to be guilty? Toward whom are you guilty?

    2) Have you seen or experienced the consequences of another person’s sins? How did you feel about those consequences? How did you feel about the person as a result of those consequences?

    3) There is a trap when we focus on these two passages, and that is ignoring collective sin. What are collective sins that you can think of? What do you think the consequences were/are?

  • Forgetting the Story

    Jonah 3:1–10, Nahum 1:1–11

    The story of Jonah has always been a big fish story. It catches our attention. Whether Jonah was alive in the whale/fish for 3 days (evidence indicates it’s possible) or if it was a and story, it doesn’t fail to capture our attention. Even unbeliever get the story.

    We pick on Jonah a lot. First, he ran away. Then, when he was successful with the , he got angry. Then there is all the stuff in between. He was a mess.

    Whether the people of Nineveh repented because they were horrified at the translucent skin (stomach acids) and/or were they truly fearful of God. They repented. That’s what matters, or is it?

    Nahum foretells the fall of Nineveh. It happens soon after. Imagine having the legend of Jonah’s visit to your city. The bedtime stories (be good or Jonah’s God will get you). A few generations and gut-wrenching became legend became fairy tale became empty. Nineveh falls.

    It is a story repeated in the . It is a tale as old as time. People don’t really . They forget. Even in the most families, people wander off.

    1) Why do you think people wander off?

    2) What does it take to keep people from wandering off?

    3) Truly, what can you do to keep people from wandering off?

  • Staying Behind

    Ezra 1:1–6, Hebrews 13:9–15

    Imagine being one of the children or grandchildren who had only heard of the homeland. Imagine having only the legends to live on. Your told you of a place where you actually belonged, instead of being an outsider among other outsiders. Even those who had come from the land had probably lost that God would restore them (what few of them remained).

    Then a declaration from Cyrus was probably first a shock. All of sudden, things were different. For many, it was a that God was indeed . For , sadly, it was more a sign of Cyrus’ manipulation or pity (the cynics). There there was the last group. This group is the ones who cast aside the land and their heritage.

    The don’t really talk about them. Many concern themselves with the “lost” 10 tribes of Israel. Those that returned to the Promised Land didn’t concern themselves with those who remained (too much, rightly, concerned about restoring the people and the land).

    Those that remained integrated into Persian society. They had become Persian. They had to set their in a foreign land. Who knows what the motive was? Was it finances? Was it security? Was it a lack of in God? Their motivations and histories can only be guessed.

    What we do know is that they succumbed to the world. That is why we need to keep the words in Hebrews in mind. The Hebrews that remained (i.e., became Persian) forgot their place in the world was not set by the world, but by the Creator of the world.

    1) Why is important to keep the concept of our “real home” in mind as we walk through this ?

    2) What is the danger of keeping our “real home” too much in the forefront on our minds?

  • Attending Well

    Deuteronomy 30:15–20, Acts 4:5–22

    If someone were to us a about being given the way to or death, there would likely be an automatic naysayer . This is the case when the “way” is exercise, healthy eating (including the latest fads), life philosophy. In the Christian context, we understand the Jesus is that “way”. To many of us who have heard and believed, this is obvious.

    Yet, there are many in the and the world that when they something along the lines of, “See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity,” they turn off. You, too, might have that exact same response. It’s an understandable response because we see the saying it, and we know humans. They don’t really understand the “way”. How can they, they’re only human.

    The way of life and prosperity is empowered by the attention to the . Man cannot do it alone. Man needs to be in humble partnership with God, letting God lead. The importance of humility cannot be overstated. If we were to take, for example. prosperity to its extreme, we all understand that it is an issue. Really, the promise that was given was that Israel would have enough.

    Yet, to have even enough, they would have to walk in harmony with God. That is often the hard part. The leaders of the Jews were so strongly focused on the right checkboxes that they could no longer see the way. With the disciples, we also see a transformation of the promise. The prosperity was not of this world (except, one hopes, in framily).

    The other darker transformation of the promise is that the way often leads to adversity and death. The disciples experienced both, as do many Christians around the world today.

    1) What do you think about the promise changing? Do you agree, or disagree? Why?

    2) Financial prosperity has often been used to judge God’s and a person’s faithfulness. What is your take on that?

  • Faithful Servanthood

    Psalm 127, Matthew 25:14–30, Luke 22:35–38

    The question is often asked, “when you get to Heaven, what do you want to ?”

    The common answer is, “well done, good and .”

    It is a feel-good statement. Truthfully, we would all like to hear that from God.

    In the parable, the servants were given to build up the master’s coffers. The interesting part about the parable is that 2 servants did well, and 1 servant did (basically) nothing. The reality is that in investing, you lose money, too. That is part of the risk. A person who launches a small business is putting their money at risk to be successful, with no guarantees. In the parable, we don’t have a servant that tried and failed. There is either trying and succeeding, or there is nothing ().

    This seems significant. Though perhaps it is not. It could be argued that the 2 successful servants were blessed (Psalm 17:1) and the other servant just missed out. This is often the interpretation, as it is seen as applying to Israel for not up to its potential. In fact, burying the money was (culturally) from liability, for if buried money is stolen, there was no responsibility.

    In Matthew’s version of the parable (or a different contextual telling of the parable), Matthew used “faithful” to describe the servant, while Luke did not. For Matthew, this was a matter of . The master trusted the servant to do the right thing (with what the Master gave), and be successful with it.

    When it comes to real , however, it is not so clear-cut. In his last hours with his disciples, Jesus alludes to the disciples being taken care of when sent out by him earlier in the ministry. Yet, now they are to be self-prepared (instead of being taken care of) and even armed (though the weapon-like nature of the sword is questionable).

    1) Why do you think there is such a difference between the servants in the parable and the disciples with Jesus?

    2) What is your to faithful in this context? What do you think it means? Do you think you are being faithful?

    3) If one takes the parable too literally, one can conclude that a person is an unfaithful servant if they fail. What do you think about that?

  • Blaming God

    2 Chronicles 12:1–8, James 1:12–15
    When we read the Old Testament, the phrasing is often such that we could say God caused most suffering. In fact, there are many who truly believe that despite the balance of .

    Let’s take the story of Rehoboam and Shishak. Rehoboam was the of Solomon, son of David. David was the man that God promised would have a descendant on the throne of Israel, as long as they were . For 3 years, Rehoboam was faithful. Rehoboam used the Law to establish his and authority. Once that was done, he was done with the Law. Rehoboam’s reign didn’t exactly start well, but he could have done alright had he (and Israel alongside him) stayed faithful to God.

    This is the same with each and every one of us. We may ask about the innocents (like children) who, through no fault of their own, are pulled into the brokenness of the of humanity, and up suffering because of it. We may not even be aware of it.

    God does Rehoboam to account. Rehoboam—and Judah with him—will be abandoned to the ravages of the latest military dominator, Shishak. Abandoned. There is a lot that can be pulled from this. The primary one is that Judah has been under God’s protection, guarding them against Shishak. God wasn’t going to make Shishak attack Judah. Shishak would have naturally gone against Judah. It would have been God’s protection that kept Shishak from attacking.
    Rehoboam’s and Judah’s humbled themselves (kind of surprising for Rehoboam), God relented…somewhat. The gist of it was that God would still let Shishak attack, but that the result would not be desolation, but becoming a subordinated people. Was it great? No. It was intended to be a learning lesson, but the hearts of Rehoboam and Judah were to set in their own ways (already!) to fully to God.
    The sad reality is that in situations like this, we ourselves can often become this type of hardhearted person. In certain instances, God may have kept the worst consequences of our behavior from affecting us, while still allowing some so that we would be disciplined. Instead, we can often see the lesser consequence of God not doing something and complain.
    James was obviously dealing with something similar but in the realm of . The lack of personal responsibility drew strong rebuke from James. He did not want people to blame God for their choices (and the consequences of those choices). Rehoboam succumbed to temptation (of not following God). He had a choice. God did not make him choose to succumb, nor did God try to tempt Rehoboam.
    1) Have you ever blamed God for temptation (or more specifically falling for it), or making you too weak?
    2) Have you ever heard someone else blame God for their succumbing to temptation? How did you ?

  • Faithfully Blind Together

    Leviticus 21:16–24, Matthew 20:29–34, 1 Corinthians 1:26–29

    Even today people struggle with blindness. Granted, today those who are blind have legal protections, braille, technology, and acceptance that wasn’t part of other cultures. In the New Testament era, the only “job” the blind could get was begging. Doesn’t sound very fulfilling or enjoyable.

    Our story in Matthew takes place on ‘ last journey to Jerusalem. Whether the large crowd was only because of Jesus or also because of the approaching Days is somewhat up for discussion. Regardless, though, the blind men were probably looking forward to having a more successful attempt at begging, due to the emotional high that people would have had, and the affiliation of almsgiving with Holy Days.

    Instead, they hear Jesus is coming. They probably had already heard the stories of the miracles he performed. That Jesus would be near them would be exciting and would be -filled. They cried out, but the crowd tried to silence them. Some commentators take a symbolic view of this. The crowd is the world (and Satan) trying to drown out the coming of Jesus. The blind men, like Christians, have to the world to Jesus. It might be taking a few too many liberties, but the reality is these men overcame the crowd.

    In all likelihood, this was not behavior for them. They would generally be meek so as to not be bullied. Yet, they went for it. They took the risk. Opposed the crowd. They could now see.

    The weak. desires. The despised. Yet, Jesus heard their cries and healed them. Paul notes that the world has a different form of evaluation and valuing people than the of God.

    1) What have your thoughts been (whether now or in the past) of people who were not fully as capable (physical or mental) as you?

    2) People are quick to value people based upon their physical bodies. Why do you think that is?

    3) Why do you think Paul concludes with, “…so that no one may boast in his …”?