Devotion.al

Tag: family

  • Passing It Off

    Genesis 17:1–7, 15–16; Romans 4:13–25; Mark 8:31–38

    I grew up with Richard Scarry books. One of my favorite stories was about the Bunny going to bed. As Daddy Bunny put each child to bed, each child shared their “” dream job. The last child said, “I’ll be what I’ll be,” and he dreamed to be a Daddy Bunny. Of course, my dad that I identified with that last child. One of my greatest honors is the fact that I am a dad.

    My wasn’t that my kids would be my (not the thought pattern of a child), but Abraham’s was. Culturally, a person without a legacy (and the legacy being children than other things) was close to worthless. Ishmael ( with a ) and Isaac (son with the wife) were it (at this point).  Not much of a legacy for the era.

    Yet, Abraham’s imputed was because he believed (trusted) God when God said that Abraham would be the father of nations. This is why centers on our inheritance through faith.

    Paul notes that we are Abraham’s legacy. We are Abraham’s children through faith, not (necessarily) by blood. While Paul is here dealing with the “inheritance” aspect of Jew versus Gentile, there are other aspects that we can examine.

    An inheritance is not “earned”. An inheritance is given. It is given by the person whose it is to the person (or people) whose it isn’t. Even when dealing with the how (blood or faith) of the inheritance, Paul overrides it all with the of the inheritance.

    ※Reflection※

    • Have you ever had an inheritance? Were you surprised by it?
    • What does having an inheritance from God mean to you? How is an inheritance from God different from an inheritance from a family member or someone else?

    ※Prayer※

    Gracious God, may we never view the inheritance we’ve been given as something we’ve earned or deserve. Amen.

  • What’s In A Name?

    What’s In A Name?

    Genesis 16:7–15; Mark 8:27–30

    Relational abuse is not something we should tolerate. This is with the understanding that abuse is the regular, deliberate intent to harm or diminish another. It’s important to address this based on Hagar’s statement to the Lord’s messenger.

    Based upon the Scriptures, Hagar presumed too much. As the first (Sarah being the other) person to conceive a child of Abraham, Hagar no longer viewed Sarah as deserving her . Culturally, this would be the “second wife” taking over the place of “the first” wife in the . That would have been a move of significant dishonor. In a culture that highly values , it’s almost like killing Sarah (yes, that would be the significance of dishonoring). Sarah would not have taken that well.

    Hagar, on the other hand, would have likely viewed her (Hagar’s) place as being of greater honor due to conception. From Hagar’s viewpoint (honor and respect being integral), anything that Sarah did that “kept” Hagar in “her place” as second wife (even though a servant) would be insulting and harsh. From her , Hagar “earned” her new place as first wife.

    We have a hard time understanding this, as our enculturation includes monogamy.  It is critical when reading the Scriptures to understand where our culture (and thus understanding) doesn’t mesh with the culture(s) portrayed in the Scriptures.

    From a cultural standpoint, Hagar had betrayed the family. The messenger made no such accusation. The messenger just said, go back. The messenger also gave a name to the son to be born…Ishmael (he hears). God heard Hagar and the son was named to bear to this .

    Assigning names is not a small thing. Names are both a beginning and an . Multiple times in the Scriptures, a person gains a new name after a significant (God) event. Thus, when Jesus asks his disciples (his friends) who do they say he is, Jesus is being vulnerable.

    We look at this passage knowing that Jesus is the Messiah, but when we think about it, when Jesus puts this question before the disciples, he is opening himself up to many things. The names/identities that the disciples say are saying would not have the full effect or import.

    One of the things that any of the identities/names that the disciples had put forth would, in some respects, diminish Jesus’ ministry. All of them were those that came before Jesus, so Jesus would have been “just” a repeat. They even brought up John the Baptist! Talk about a misunderstanding of God!

    Jesus’ vulnerability to being misnamed is significant on multiple fronts. It showed his effectiveness. The disciples (or at least Peter) correctly identified Jesus. This provides a greater perspective regarding what Jesus did before, and what he did after.

    “You are the Christ,” is similar to getting a new name. Something happened. In at least one ‘s eyes, Jesus wasn’t just a good religious man. Jesus went from prophetic friend to the hope for change and . For Peter, it may have also been one of the hardest things. His friend became someone undeniably more than ordinary.

    ※Reflection※

    • What does your name mean to you? What did your name mean to your parents (if you know)?
    • What nicknames do you have for people you know? How about for people you don’t know (like that driver who encroached or cut you off)? What do these names mean?

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, we have many names and titles in this world. Thank you for the one the surpasses them all, Child of God. Amen.

  • Face-to-Face With Jesus

    Face-to-Face With Jesus

    Psalm 25:1–10; Genesis 9:8–17; 1 Peter 3:18–22; Mark 1:9–15

    A number of years ago, I was part of a drama that was really a hellfire and brimstone (or “turn or burn”) presentation. As my theology has deepened, and my wrestlings with the Scriptures have continued, the over-simplification of it bothers me. Much of everything around it now bothers me.

    Despite my misgivings, there was a prevailing Truth that it conveyed. We will all be standing before Jesus at some point, either having made a decision or needing to make a decision.

    There will be some that question the doors that this statement opens. Noah and his , for example, did not know Jesus (as we understand Jesus). They did experience God’s miraculous rescue from the Flood (that some a prefiguring of Baptism). Noah’s and trust were enough to carry his family beyond the Flood, but what happens after is something different.

    One of the biggest claims against Jesus Christ being the Way, the Truth, and the , and Jesus being the only way to God (and the everlasting life) is this apparent conflict between the unending , mercy, and love God and this restriction.

    Thus, it is not a small thing to seek to understand what about those who don’t have the chance to accept or deny Jesus.

    We have some foretaste of things with the story of Noah. It is, however, the knowledge shared 1 Peter 3 that provides the greatest hint. It is of such significance that the has alluded to it for over 1600 years in the Apostle’s Creed.

    The Spirit of Christ “preached” to the souls in the realm of the dead. The dead (in case that didn’t hit home…the dead) met Jesus Christ face-to-face. The dead had the opportunity to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior after they died!

    This is not to say that we should just let everyone die to meet Jesus then. Absolutely not! It is, however, an answer to those who question the mercy, grace, and love of God’s salvation.

    Does this give a perfect answer? Probably not. Those who look for any reason not to believe…will not believe. We are only expected to be with and to the Word.

    ※※

    • Have you ever had anyone question the “truth” of Jesus when it comes to those who hadn’t had the chance to the ? What was your response? Was it helpful to them or you?
    • Why does an understanding of the Gospel and salvation have an important part of our Lenten journey?

     

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, there is no one that you do not want to turn to you for salvation. May we be the vessels of grace and mercy that draw people to the Gospel. Amen.

  • Seeing Well

    Seeing Well

    Psalm 50:1–6; 1 Kings 16:1–7; Luke 19:41–44

    “If only I had known…”

    We often will look back on our decisions as if we could have fixed them, or even with the assumption that we are wiser now than we were then. “ is 20/20,” is a pithy saying, but even our hindsight may only be slightly better than our .

    Baasha had hindsight. God’s had come true about Jeroboam’s fall. Baasha, therefore, had foresight of what was expected. Baasha maintained the false set up by Jeroboam (and continued by his son, Nadab). This was after assassinating Nadab.

    Jehu was sent to announce the consequences. Baasha had a chance and still went his own way, and his died out as consequence. Baasha had foresight and hindsight…and still, he made the decision of false worship.

    While the false worship of idols and such from Jeroboam to Baasha is certainly large and significant, the false worship that Jesus confronts is different. Jerusalem, from a Jewish , was the City of God. It had a special place. One would think that the exile would have dealt with some of that, but it is quite likely that the Maccabean revolution restored much of that perspective.

    Along with that was the inability of people to see God moving among them. We’re not just talking about Jesus, but the entire era. The Jewish world was unsettled, with and without Roman oversight. God was shaking things up.

    Jesus’ words were aimed at two things. The first was the false idol of Jerusalem. It sounds almost blasphemous. However, transforming, “I will you there,” and “I will put my name there,” into only meeting God there is a problem.

    The other issue is being unable to see the when it is right next to you. The phrasing here in Luke is distinct as it is about . This contrasts with the imagery of Jerusalem falling in conquest. Seeing (and accepting) the Kingdom of God (peace) is the opposite of the world (conflict).

    We often view these words in Luke as a kind of end times , especially as Jerusalem did indeed fall a few decades later. God, though, isn’t so concerned about a place (not that God isn’t), as God is concerned about the people. It may be that Jesus was looking for people to see the disruption of God’s Kingdom on earth when in the middle of the corrupt world.

    ※Reflection※

    • What do you have the greatest hindsight regret for? What do you have the greatest hindsight appreciation for?
    • How do you see God moving today in comparison to the story around Baasha, and in comparison, to Jesus going through Jerusalem?

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, as you transform us, may we transform the world around us. Help us to look for your hand in the past and look for your grace in the future. Amen.

  • Forging Character

    Forging Character

    Psalm 50:1–6; 1 Kings 14:1–18; 1 Timothy 1:12–20

    You probably believe that you have never had a prophesy (a “word” from God) spoken “over” you. You might be right. As such, you’ve never had someone say to you, “I thought of you when I read/heard this.” Nor have you heard, “I felt I had to this with you.” Nor have you ever had your “struck” by a sermon, a song, or a moment.

    If you’ve never had any of these happen, it might be time to stop reading this and God when it has happened (note, this wasn’t a whether).

    Not all prophetic words are positive for a person. Jeroboam, his wife, and their (Abijah) received a prophetic word. It wasn’t good. There are multiple points that are sad.

    Abijah was probably very young when he died (based on context). As he was young, he hadn’t developed the bad habits of his father and . That he was the only member of the family to be honored in is telling.

    The other sad part is that Jeroboam and his wife (and by extension their children) heard and witnessed the prophetic word coming true and their hearts were not (it seems) changed. God has relented in punishment (or reduced it) when a person repents. Jeroboam didn’t bother.

    emphasizes God’s relenting tendencies by his own testimony. He reminds Timothy that he (Paul) was the enemy of Christ and Christians before he became the champion he was. In just a few words, Paul shows us the depth of the tragedy of Jeroboam and all those like him throughout history and today.

    Paul’s perspective is also important regarding his instructions to Timothy about “waging war” (the implication being a war of faith) and the cast out Hymenaeus and Alexander. It may well be that this passage is about Timothy either mourning or trying to drawback Hymenaeus and Alexander into the .

    It would make sense as Paul reminds Timothy that the prophetic word that was “over” him was about waging a war of faith. The situation with Hymenaeus and Alexander seemed to require some sort of battle with the two. Paul told Timothy that he (Paul) had let them free. As Paul was Timothy’s mentor, the strong implication is that Paul wanted Timothy to do the same.

    It is Paul’s preceding words that provide the “silver lining” to Hymenaeus and Alexander being handed over to Satan. They can still return, for Christ is every faithful and loving. In addition, Paul added a “to be taught” clause, meaning that his expectation is that Hymenaeus and Alexander are likely to return.

    ※Reflection※

    • It can be hard to let someone fall away as Hymenaeus and Alexander. What can we observe about God in these situations? What can we observe about ourselves?

    ※Prayer※

    Lord Christ, thank you for your toward us and the unending grace you pour into our lives. Help our hearts to see your faithfulness and grace poured out for the world. Amen.

  • Wages of Worth

    Wages of Worth

    1 Corinthians 9:1–16

    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 . 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 , no one was paid differently because of their race or gender, but that part was never part of my purview.

    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 ).

    To protect the innocent, I will say there once was a 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 ) 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) 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 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 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.

  • In All Things

    Revelation 2:12–17

    A conversation that I have had many times, and you may, too, is why are there so many denominations? Aren’t we all one? Don’t we all believe the same thing?

    There are some things that are common among denominations: God “the Father”, Jesus Christ (God “the Son”), the , the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy ) that is One God, the fallen state of man, Jesus came to pay the penalty, Jesus came to reconcile man to God, Jesus died (penalty paid), Jesus resurrected (eternal life), by Christ we are adopted into the eternal of God through repentance, Christ will come again, Heaven and Hell (though understandings differ). Not exhaustive basics, but you will find that Christians agree to these. If you want the full list, the Apostle’s Creed and Creed summarize this well.

    So, again, why all the denominations?

    Well, because we’re human. Some would say pride divided the church. would say fear divided the church. Others would say nationalism divided the church. This is not an exhaustive list…not by far. The letter to Pergamum actually helps provide light.

    Pergamum was a city of many gods. The two prominent temples were one to Zeus (with supposedly 24-hour a day sacrifices) and one to Caesar (the emperor). Within the context of Revelation, it would not be surprising that Caesar is the primary focus, however, the regular sacrificing to Zeus is definitely important in this letter to Pergamum.

    Who the Nicolaitans were is unknown (plenty of speculation, though). From what can gather, however, they were a group of “fallen” Christians who were as much in and of the world as they were of the church. As they had not denied Christ, they weren’t too far gone. One can readily conclude that it’s close.

    While we don’t know the end result, recent (the last few hundred years) church history shows us what can happen…denominations. We do not want to dismiss the Nicolaitans, but if we re-read the Scriptures, we can see wording that is often used the separate ourselves from others.

    In the time of the writing of Revelation, the food sacrificed to idols was a serious issue. While (in  1 Cor 8:1–13) allows for eating such, it is with the expressed requirement that it not be a snare to those weak in the . In Pergamum, it was a problem and thus not to be done.

    What happened in Pergamum is the failure of discipleship and discipline. This same charge can be levied at the church universal today.

    The flip side of this is making sure one disciplines (or divides, if necessary) for the correct reasons. There are far fewer reasons to separate than the many denominations provide witness to.

    In addition, there is the failure to . Discipleship is divided into the why (theology, philosophy, information) and how (living life ). One without the other is only half-discipleship, and Pergamum is an example.

    Honestly, discipleship has become a buzzword and discipline…well, nobody likes it. The only problem? God requires them.

    ※Reflection※

    • What does “church” discipline mean to you? What would it mean to you if a friend “disciplined” you?
    • What does discipleship mean to you? What does it mean to disciple another? What does it mean to be discipled?
  • No Name

    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. were relating an individual to something else. Others were shortening of a proper 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 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 . 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 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 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 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 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 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) 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.