Devotion.al

Tag: freedom

  • 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 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 freedom 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 that leads to death is ominous. What do you think that might be?

  • Checkmarks and Tasks

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

    The church in Galatia was struggling. Someone was pouring bad ideas and thoughts into them, causing them to walk away from the that 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 (righteous, performed in compliance with the law) actions that saved them. It was no longer Jesus Christ.

    Often that is the trap of . 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 freedom.

    Last week, Rachel Held Evans died at the 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 filled when challenged, as they hear the heart and 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 love. 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 grow in their faith.

    1) Growth and challenge. Why is it that when we are challenged, we grow? How how you see in work, life, 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 from each other. In so doing, they can show the world that opposites can work 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?

  • Inherting Legacy

    Genesis 47:18–26, Acts 4:34–5:11

    In the 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 power. 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 it to the (i.e., the church friends and family of Generations Community 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 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’ act 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 relationship, 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?

  • Being and Becoming the Bridge

    Isaiah 30:18–26, Isaiah 61:10–11, 1 Corinthians 3:5–11, 1 Corinthians 11:23–26

    We are the bridge between the past and the future, with one foot in the past and one foot in the future.

    The past of glory was gone, a faded memory. Perhaps to some it was just an old tale that was from the crazy aunt. David and Solomon? Sure. Whatever you say, Auntie.

    Into hearts that resided in , Isaiah spoke and life. People who felt oppressed were promised the freedom of planting crops and harvesting them on their own behalf, not under the rule of foreigners. Not only that, Isaiah told them that they would turn their backs on their treasured idols. They were being told that the little gods that had protected them would be thrown away. That’s crazy!

    Isaiah later talks about the earth and garden producing as they should, because God has provided salvation and blessed them. Not their idols. The promise of God’s blossoming righteousness in the hearts of people who had abandoned their God who had them to bear his .

    Death to life. During this series of devotions, we haven’t spoken much on Lent, but with this last devotion for the series it seems appropriate. Lent comes from Old English and German, meaning spring. Spring comes at the of Winter (the land almost “dead”, but waiting to come alive). Just like the Jews, who were in their “Winter”, so are we before our salvation.

    Paul and Apollos worked on ground that wasn’t yet “alive”. Yet, they planted the and watered it. Eventually, new growth in dead ground came alive and blossomed. While were fighting over who they followed (Paul, Apollos, or others), these coworkers in Christ looked ahead to see a crop that God empowered them to see, even if they did not see it now.

    Our bridge from death to life and from past to future is the legacy of our faith. Paul proclaims it best, “…as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” The past and future. While we and honor the past, we must look to the future of ourselves, our family, our church, our faith, and the world.

    1) What do you think the future of this church should look like? What can you do to help that come to pass?

    2) Often, we are blinded to our vision of the future, and thus tear down the future visions of others. What can you and we do to embrace the visions of others for the future?

    3) Paul’s concluding statement covers both past and future. How can Paul’s conclusion empower and educate your vision and how to make it come to pass?

  • Welcomed To The Table

    Genesis 12:1-7, Ruth 2:13–19, Job 31:24–32

    For many of us (if not most), the call of Abram (who would become Abraham) doesn’t seem that significant from a strictly perspective. Yes, any of us would find being called by God significant, but the calling away from relatives and land is not so strange. This is not the case here. There is a with the land. The land of one’s ancestors. There is also the concept of leaving one’s .

    American culture, especially Western American culture, has some significant breaks with the culture of Abram. The settler and/or explorer mentality which underlies much of American founding is not conducive to family roots, or least always staying near home. America celebrates individuality and freedom to culturally understand what God is having Abram do. The only exception to this break had been agricultural families, but with the increasing transformation from family to corporate farms, even that is going away.

    Abram was separated from his family and land by choice. Yes, it was God’s direction, but in his culture, leaving was a big break. While he had his household, he was now a household of wanderers. Where is home for such wandering group? By leaving the ties of the land, Abram would now effectively be a guest wherever he went.

    Ruth was the same. Yes, she had married an Israelite, but he was dead. She didn’t have to leave her homeland. However, in her she had made a decision that her husband’s family was truly her own, breaking her family ties. What made her decision even more significant was that all that was left of her husband’s immediate family was his widowed mother. Not much of a family structure for support. Now that Ruth and Naomi were back in Israelite land, Ruth was now responsible for both. By the of God, she fell into the care of Boaz, a distant relative. Boaz welcomed her above and beyond a . He truly welcomed her to his table to eat. She had no functional value to him, yet he welcomed her.

    And welcoming others to the table is what Job did, too. He was righteous in this. It wasn’t that he had a long line of people that would take advantage of this ( strong cultural taboo against it), so turning people away likely didn’t happen. He welcomed people to the table.

    1) Abram was a guest. Why would other landowners welcome him to their table? Why might they not?

    2) Culturally, much of American culture has turned away from welcoming strangers (hospitality). Why do you think that is? When do you think it started to ?

    3) Generations (along with the Church of the Nazarene) practices “Open Communion.” How does that apply to Abram, Ruth, and Job? How do Abram, Ruth, and Job apply to “Open Communion?”

  • Learn What Was Lost

    Psalm 63:1–8, Isaiah 5:1–7, Luke 6:43–45

    “…Your is better than .” Do you ‘s love for you that way? Greater than life. This is similar to ‘ words about surrendering one’s life to the cross (Luke 14:25–27). David’s psalm is full of love of and for God. It is full of . This how God’s love is indeed better than life: trust.

    Yet, all too often people look at God’s love as not all that great. Isaiah’s Song of the Vineyard talks about how people have despised what God had done preparing the Promised Land for the people of Israel. What more could God have done? What so many people often seem to want God to do…make them. God, being God, does not make us (or the Israelites) follow, obey, or love him. Instead, God tears down his work. If they despise his gifts, why should they have them at all? Of course, the goal is not destruction or , but it is to what they have lost.

    In many ways, God sought to prune Israel and Judah of what turned them from God…pride. When Jesus turns to trees, instead of vineyards, the is the same. A tree, to produce more fruit, will be pruned. However, Jesus sets this as an all or nothing. Jesus says that a tree (person) produces either good or bad fruit. We all produce good and bad fruit, it would seem.

    1) As we look at the Song of the Vineyard, what insights does it provide you in regards to the parable of the good tree and the bad tree?

    2) Often we are more aware of the bad in our lives than the good. Can you see in your life where God has “built” your vineyard? What are the signs?

    3) People want , and yet often want people someone to “make them” do the right thing, just like the Israelites and Jews. Why do you think people are like this? Where do you see this behavior in your life?

  • Unveiling Transfiguration

    Psalm 99, Exodus 34:29–35, 2 Corinthians 3:12–4:2, Luke 9:28–36

    Sometimes things we are unaware of about ourselves become a separator be us and . Imagine Moses already feeling the pressure of leading these people. The strain of leadership along with the regular stubbornness of the Israelites would always keep some separation between Moses and the people. In addition, Moses’ history as part of Pharoh’s household would always be an underlying issue. Now Moses presented himself before God, and he was changed. He was physically different in such a way as apparently people avoided looking at his face. Moses then put on clothing (a ) that physically and psychologically separated him from his people. We all want to not have to wear masks. We all want to be able to be ourselves with others. Moses no longer had that option. He had to wear a mask (the veil) so that people would interact with him. Moses was blessed to be able to have such an intimate with God. On the other hand, because of that relationship with God, Moses’ relationship with the people was not so good, as they struggled with it.

    Paul uses this example to help explain the way it was in comparison to the new in Christ. The new life in Christ is where each person, not a single , has a relationship with God. In addition, instead of having an outward (though still possible), it was now an inward work. As it is now God working inside of us, we are freed from the “veil” that separates our “normal” life from a life with God. However, sometimes we become confused as to how it works (which is easy to do).

    Peter, John, and James accompanied Jesus up the mountain. There was obviously an expectation that this would be a time of reflection and especially . A time of confrontation was not expected by Jesus’ followers. They saw Jesus change from a man to something more. As men steeped in the lessons of the Jews, they would have understood that this is the glory that people experienced when looking at Moses, and yet it was not just Jesus’ face. His entire being and even his clothes were transformed. Adding to the reality of this, Moses (the venerated first prophet) and Elijah (the prophet that was to precede the Messiah) were present. This was beyond any and all expectation.

    Whether the men wanted this experience to continue, or whether they were trying to be respectful, it doubt strange to build shelters. On the other hand, the expectation of being able to visit the great men of Israel (Jesus included) would have been a transformative thing for the entire community, yet it was not to be. The of Moses and Elijah accompanying Jesus was not to establish the wise men of Israel but to establish Jesus’ rightful place. the last words to Peter, James, and John, though, was the real lesson. This was the teaching that the prophets and Jesus were handing off the leadership of the new to the next leaders.

    Peter, James, and John were selected. Despite their future failings, there were still the ones that would be leaders of the community that was coming. They would be bearers of God’s grace, , love, and freedom. Their personal relationship with Jesus showing that anyone can have a personal relationship with God.

    1) What “veils” exist in your spiritual life?

    2) What things, opportunities, habits, people keep you from relating to others and God?

    3/FD) What lessons can you learn from Peter, James, and John in this event they experienced?

  • Not Always Better

    Deuteronomy 9:1–9:7, Psalm 36, Romans 5:20–6:11

    You have been trouble from the beginning of this! Moses’ long good-bye (all of Deuteronomy) is a summary of God, God’s message, God’s calling, and Israel’s past, current, and future response. It’s not pretty.

    We can often look at the Israelites and question their memory, wisdom, or sanity. How do they keep making the same basic mistakes? Of course, we really get the Cliff Notes or Spark Notes version. A quick summary of the highlights, 40 years of highlights. If you could only write the highlights of your , you could make it short, too. Plus, you would write about you, and some close family, and maybe some large events. This summary of the Israelites journey from Egypt to the threshold of the Promised Land (for the 2nd time) is for a populace that many times larger than the City of Marysville. If we took only our highlights, or perhaps lowlights, our story may sound similar. Moses is driving home a point. Don’t take God’s for granted, and don’t ruin the inheritance of God.

    Much of the story of the Israelites’ travels from Egypt to the Promised Land is about hearts that were not continually grateful (and therefore humble). They had food they barely worked for (Mana). They were (generally) protected from enemies. Their clothes and sandals didn’t wear out. They had plenty of herds. They had plundered Egypt. They became comfortable with what they had and felt they should get more. They looked back at an idealized and false view of Egypt and threatened to return to Egypt if they didn’t get what they wanted. They certainly weren’t . They were definitely stubborn. They were receiving the result of God’s promise to people long dead. God was .

    Even in Moses’ time, the of Paul’s words still rings loudly, “…where multiplied, grace multiplied even more.” (Romans 5:21) Throughout the journey, God’s grace was abundant. While the Israelites didn’t think this way, apparently there were that wanted to sin more (or thought they should) so that God’s grace would be even larger. Paul’s head may have not been in his hands in disbelief, but nevertheless, his disbelief comes through his writing. Of course, we should seek to sin more! That’s what we were saved from! Why would we go back to that life? Oh, wait, that sounds familiar. The Israelites wanted to go back to “that life.” Somehow, the slavery that they left (the law and sin) was somehow better than the Promised Land (grace and blessing).

    That is, however, the problem with many of the sins we struggle with. It seems “better” to live that way. It seems “better” to the world. It seems “better” to those around us. It must be better than.

    1) Why do we often return to the bad stuff (habits, behaviors, thoughts) that has been and is working out of us?

    2) Why does our of the way we used to live still pull us back?

    3) The Israelites left harsh conditions. Why would they choose slavery over freedom? When have you done the same?

    FD) What is grace?