We'd appreciate you allowing the use of cookies. They are anonymized while allowing us to see how the site is used.

Devotion.al

Tag: give

  • Grateful In Ashes

    Joel 2:12-17, Psalm 51:1-17, 2 Corinthians 4:21-6:10 (read online ⧉)

    Through the prophet Joel, God sought to realign the life of the Israelites to Him. God was calling them to live a life oriented to Him. God didn’t want them to miss out on the life they were meant for. As we begin the Lenten season, it is a time for each of us to reflect upon what in our life is keeping us from being oriented on Him.

    From the early days of our faith, Christians have observed the remembrance of Christ’s passion (Good Friday) and resurrection (Easter) with great reverence. It became the custom to prepare for that observance by a season of prayer and fasting, and the reconciliation of those who had been separated from the community of faith. When keeping the season of Lent, we take to heart God’s call to repentance and the assurance of forgiveness proclaimed in the gospel, and practice in our daily lives the work of reconciliation. You are invited to the observance of Lent through self-examination and repentance; by prayer, fasting, and self-denial; and by reading and meditating on God’s Holy Word.

    On Ash Wednesday, many people to receive the mark of ashes, which is a reminder of our mortal nature and of God’s invitation to receive Christ’s redeeming work. The ashes are a sign of repentance, that one’s life is not as God-focused as it ought to be. It is a declaration that all is not well, that something needs to change.

    As we walk together through Lent, through our paths of reflection, self-denial, and repentance, this is all part of our response of gratitude to God who sent Jesus Christ, the ultimate love letter, to us that we can see that God wants us as His Children.

    1) Giving up something (self-denial and/or fasting) is often practiced during Lent. The purpose is to grow closer to God. If you choose to do this, what will you give up? We challenge you to share whatever this is with someone who will hold you accountable.

    2) Other practices for Lent are focused prayer, self-examination, deeper scripture reading, all of which are intended to draw us deeper and to slow us down. What will you focus on this Lent to grow your Christian walk?

    3) One of the newer trends is to give up something you know you need to give up already. Do you think that could be effective as a spiritual discipline? Why or why not?

  • Learn Deeply

    Mark 9:2–13, Mark 9:30–32 (read online ⧉)

    School could bring happiness to some, and great misery to others. Often the refrain of children is, “what’s the point.” “This is useless.” “I’ll never use this.” Perhaps you’ve said it yourself. Learning can often be hard. Learning new concepts can be even harder. Learning things that shatter your self-perception or perception of the world are the hardest of all.

    With Jesus’ fame as extensive as it was and growing, he and the disciples were probably not often alone, although we don’t really know. Only 3 of the disciples witnessed the Transfiguration. Did the 3 really not tell the others? Can you imagine witnessing such a sight and having to keep quiet? Apparently, they did. Was it possibly just one of those amazing things among other amazing things that they experienced.

    Perhaps it was time to process all those events. Jesus seems to have set some focused time with the disciples. They experienced yet something else that didn’t fit. They had to understand at some point. What is interesting is that this particular time is framed in reference to the coming cross. The implication is that Jesus did some more extensive teaching of his disciples to understand what would happen. Based on future responses, it is likely that Jesus was setting the foundation/groundwork for them to be able to understand in the future, even while they didn’t understand at that point.

    Was it frustrating to Jesus? Many would say, “of course not! He’s Jesus!” On the other hand, Jesus is man, so it makes sense that he would be quite frustrated with their thick-headedness. Teachers deal with this on a constant basis. Parents deal with this on a constant basis. Trying to pass on knowledge requires giving them the framework to build on future knowledge. In an often desperate attempt for the “them” to get it, though, there is this push to get information into them. Yet, that often results in frustration and setbacks.

    Jesus provides us a small example. Give space to process. However, in today’s world, everything is pushing information to us. We often don’t have time—and don’t make time—to process information. This means that the information we are given becomes a confused mess, and often our responses are the same. This leads to hard feelings and wall-building, which is not the intent at all.

    1) What is God calling on you to sit and process? What is one big thing/goal/learning that God has brought into your life that you need God’s help to work through?

    2) Who do you have in your life do you have to help you process things, especially “God” sorts of things?

    3) How do you process things? Do you have another word for “process”?

  • Give Us More to Bear

    Psalm 119:9–16, Proverbs 2:1–22, Ephesians 1:17–19 (read online ⧉)

    There is an old editorial cartoon…2 people come up to a fence with a sign. On the sign it reads, “do not cross over fence.” One person says to the other, “ rules are meant to keep you under control,” and the person jumps over the fence. The fence? Well, it was to keep a person from going over the cliff…

    On the opposite end of the spectrum is the sheer number of choices people have regarding food, toiletries, college majors, college classes, cars, homes, and so on. In fact, since Barry Swartz wrote The Paradox of Choice in 2004, psychologists and anthropologies have started to document what happens when we have too much choice…we actually become paralyzed in our thinking: analysis paralysis. There have also some business studies that show when there are boundaries, people make more creative and even out-of-the-box solutions to solve problems.

    The rules that Adam and Eve…correction, the single rule that Adam and Eve had to follow…they didn’t. Christian apologists and theologians have for centuries knocked the rules set out in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy as overly onerous. Yet, the civic code for many cities far outweighs the 613 rules (both positive and negative ones) that were a result. There are around 200 basic rules for American Football. If you add the permutations/variables, some counts put it close to 400. Think about that for a moment. People declare that the rules were too hard in Jesus’ time, but scream at the television during a football because the referee got the call wrong (maybe).

    A report from 1982 (the last time this was attempted) put the number of federal crimes as around 3000. First, that was 1982. While some offenses have definitely been eliminated, others have been created. Even the U.S. Federal Government cannot count how many laws, regulations, and even criminal offenses there are. This also doesn’t account for other rules regarding international behavior, nor does it cover states, nor does it cover counties, nor does it cover cities. Any organization you are a member of (including businesses, schools, churches) have their own sets of rules, too. Just setting aside speeding, most people break laws every day, and a lot of them we may not even know (if the monitors of the laws don’t even know what the laws are).

    We don’t seem to mind the laws of man. In fact, in pretty much every election cycle there is some call for some new regulation/law/crime…but God better not tell us what to do! There is something…bothersome…that just bugs us that God tells us, “no”. Part of it, so it seems, is that we think we understand other humans. So, we regulate them to protect ourselves. We push for laws for “them”, but don’t think of ourselves as “them”. Of course, “they” want to regulate us, so they pass their laws, too.

    God, on the other hand, really is not the God of regulations. That’s a human thing. God gives us free will. God did give us boundaries. As the Creator, God might just happen to know what is best for us. Still, we seem to struggle.

    1) What is the one “don’t” from God that you struggle with? Are sure that is a God don’t, and not a human don’t?

    2) Human don’ts can be good, too. What human don’t (or don’ts) can you think of that align with God’s?

    3) Why do you think it appears to be easier to obey 3000+ human laws, but harder to obey 613 of God’s laws?*

    *Note that the 613 laws are being used as an example and to make a point. They are not automatically rules for life. Jesus Christ transformed the Law into something completely different.

  • Relating Relationally

    Genesis 24:1–27, Ruth 2:1–16, 1 Corinthians 7:1–9, Hebrews 11:13–22 (read online ⧉)

    Arranged marriages are nothing new. Many arranged marriages were and are political, financial, or just friends “knowing” their children should be together. The story of Isaac and Rebekah doesn’t quite fall into those lines, but it is still an arranged marriage. Just like any marriage, there were ups and downs, good days and bad. From a generational and legacy standpoint, marriage was a core component. The servant in this story was the one who had to trust and rely on God for the journey to be a success, and to be able to go to his master (Abraham) with his task fulfilled.

    The story of Ruth is considered a success as she was faithful…and landed a husband. By landing a husband, she obtained personal security. She also obtained a legacy for her husband (and by extension, her deceased father-in-law) and her mother-in-law, Naomi. That he was honorable and rich didn’t hurt, of course. In a culture where women were not highly valued, this was a significant win for Ruth and Naomi. For the women, marriage was not just success, it was safety and identity. In the story, too, was trusting God. In this case, it was Ruth (the Moabite foreigner) who trusted and relied on God. Naomi (the Israelite) has lost her trust in God. God’s faithfulness to Ruth, however, did seem to have restored Naomi’s trust.

    In this day and age and culture, we have been spared (generally) the arranged marriages of old, though they still happen. Marriage has long been a mainstay and cultural and societal bedrock for generations, and not just in American or even Western culture, but in most cultures and ages. Yes, there are exceptions. They are few. Whether you view the current changes regarding marriage in the United States as good or bad, it has changed. There is an important reason to understand that, Americans deeply value marriage. That should give hope, but it should also make us cautious. When we raise marriage to such a high level (which we have), people quest and ache for it. Then they will pursue it. Then they will fail. This is not to say that we should not view marriage highly, but that our view of it should not be over that of widows, widowers, and singles. In fact, it is not unreasonable to conclude that much of the failure of marriages are not just unpreparedness, it is also suitableness.

    There often comes a judgemental tendency regarding this in Evangelical Christian circles. This is certainly not exclusive of Evangelical Christianity, as there is a religion that teaches (or at least use to) that a single man over the age of 25 to be a danger to society. Holding up relationships, especially romantic ones, as the panacea of all things is setting up relationships to not be able to bear the weight of expectations. Once relationships become gods, not only does God have no place, but relationships try to make up the lack of God by putting it all into the relationships.

    The other struggle is the one Paul is concerned about, and that is sexual morality. In other words, if you can’t handle your “needs”, then get married. Paul seems to put marriage as below singleness. Think about that for a moment. Paul, often elevated (rightfully) as a “doctor” of the Church, did not necessarily view marriage as anything more than a way to avoid sexual immorality. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for earthly marriage. On the other hand, Paul did say that Christ and the Church were Groom and Bride, so it’s not as if marriage wasn’t useful. Still, it wasn’t a ringing endorsement. Both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches developed monasteries and convents for those called to it. This was an elevation of singleness to the glory of God.

    Those who a single, widowed, or married are to love and value each other equally, not based upon marital status. All statuses have to rely on God for fulfillment, and none are completely fulfilling for anyone, at least not without God. It is trusting God, when we cannot see the path before us, and trusting God when our relational desires are not fulfilled. Relationships fill holes inside each and every one of us.

    1) How do you view people who are in a different relational status than you are? Why? How does that fit into being framily together?

    2) How do you incorporate into your everyday life (i.e., not just at church) those who are in a different relational state than you?

    3) How do Paul’s words (in this passage) feel to you regarding your relational status?

  • Bricks of Trust

    Psalm 13, Isaiah 26:1–6, Luke 22:39–46, Matthew 27:38–44 (read online ⧉)

    Fear is a result of many life experiences. Generally, we are not born with a spirit of distrust. Fear, in many respects, is yet another symbol or symptom of being part of the fallen world. We learn fear. We learn the distrust that precedes it. If perfect love casts out fear (1 John 4:18), then where does that leave us? We have to build up a spirit and habit of trust.
    While it isn’t ideal, nor the goal, such people should be given a lot of grace regarding trust (and they need to give it to themselves). While it will be a long and hard road for them (long for some, shorter for others), it is worth it.

    When we trust, we rebuild our spiritual and emotional foundation. By doing so, we remove fear and keep fear from getting deeper roots in us, and even not getting rooted in the first place. Imagine not having a place in your emotional and spiritual domain that has no fear! It sounds pretty amazing. If we’re honest with ourselves, it can also sound impossible.

    One of the most profound (and disturbing) examples of trust is Jesus’ trust in God the Father. Many view this as a cheat, as Jesus is God. Yet, this is why keeping in mind and heart that Jesus was a man, too, is so important. Jesus trusted God. Jesus the man may have even fully understood the plan. That didn’t spare Jesus the pain. Perhaps some of the hardest words during the crucifixion were the words of the religious leaders, who scorned Jesus’ trust in God. The implication of these words is that these leaders no longer did trust God. Perhaps they had been so broken by the world that they only trust power and riches, leaving God outside their banquets.

    1) What prevents you from trusting? How does this tie into fear, do you think?

    2) If someone violates your trust, how do you rebuild your trust in them (or have them rebuild your trust of them)? How might that apply to increasing your trust in God?

    3) Do you think there are differences between spiritual and emotional trust and distrust? Why or why not?

    Action: Find small (emphasis on small) concrete things you will trust God with.

  • What Promise?

    Psalm 146, Mark 13:14–27, Mark 13:32–33, Hebrews 11:13–22 (read online ⧉)

    The New Year is no longer new. By now many New Year’s Resolutions are broken. People have already surrendered to their loss. Often people telegraph or expect their loss, and behave as if they have already lost. By God’s grace, many of those who went before, especially those that are revered in some aspect, didn’t behave the same way.

    The Founding Fathers (of the United States) were human beings. They were marred by sin and imperfection…just like us. The system they developed, a hybrid of multiple governmental ways of thinking, was an experiment. The Founding Fathers had many fears about this system they created. Oddly enough, on both sides of the political spectrum is a growing belief that it has failed. That it failed (or hasn’t yet, or won’t, or…) is not the question or issue, nor has it ever been. The amazing thing is that it was tried at all. That a bunch of (granted) well-educated “aristocratic” men were able to motivate others not as fortunate to take on the ruling empire of the world (at that time) is amazing. It actually means, a cynical point of view, means that nothing has changed. Still to take on the British Empire was insane. These same men feared that democracy would fail, no matter what fail-safes they put into the system. They did anyway. Were they going against the flow? Would failure be catastrophic? Yes to both. Again, they did it anyway.

    When the U.S. system was designed it really had no trust in princes nor did it really have trust in people. It’s odd, wouldn’t you say, to put the fate of your legacy in the hands of people you don’t really trust? Much of the angst of the current “feeling”* really boils down to putting our faith and trust in princes (and people) who haven’t really earned it. The ones that earned it are the ones we know, not usually someone on a website or a TV screen (though in this day and age that may no longer be so).

    While it is wise to not trust humankind without some serious testing and discernment, people still do it. We have to. We cannot survive being paranoid. However, during his prophetic statements, Jesus still advises people that there will be false messiahs and false prophets. Jesus advises that the end will come with God the Father decides, and that is not for anyone else to know. Despite these words, men and women for ages have declared “special” knowledge of the end. People then feel betrayed when the end doesn’t come.

    Those that know the end date, or those who will give us power or stuff or safety, we put a lot of trust in them. Then we become upset because they failed us. When it comes to politicians and leaders we really treat them like New Year’s Resolutions…something will go wrong. We have no real hope in them, yet we still feel disappointed. Yet, we should actually be relieved when they disappoint us. Whew! They’re human just like us. That is the point of the author of Hebrews, God is not human like us. God is far more. God is faithful. God fulfills his promises.

    1) What promise(s) of God do you hold onto?

    2) What promises of people do you hold onto?

    3) Why do you think we hold onto people’s promises, yet often turn away from God’s promises?

    Action: As you read the Scriptures this week, write down the verses that seem to be promises.

  • Look at Me! Or Not…

    Luke 18:10–14, 1 Corinthians 1:26–31 (read online ⧉)

    This passage in Luke, rightfully, is often used in the church to admonish the people about how they view other Christians. This passage speaks truth to the world, no matter their beliefs. Almost every person is a Pharisee. It is part of the fallen human condition. We compare ourselves to others. All too often we look to others to evaluate ourselves, whether we are looking at success or failure.

    In the case of the Pharisee in the passage, he is looking at the “sinful” state of the tax collector. To the Pharisee, the tax collector was “contaminated” by being a tax collector. The Pharisee condemned the tax collector by an earthly state, not a spiritual one.

    The world will often judge us (and we judge the world) by careers, location, origin, and many other things. The list is long. The issue is, as it was for the Pharisee, is that this mentality is a barrier to our repentance and salvation. If we constantly, compare our ways to others (whether good or bad), we are focused on ourselves and others, and not God.

    Often we are blind to our ignorance. Paul reminds us that worldly wisdom is not all that wise in comparison to God’s wisdom. What we choose to look at in another person, may not be what God is looking at, and God is the judge.

    When we focus on God’s wisdom we get something foolish to the world, God’s righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.

    1) Do you ever compare yourself to others? If so, what areas in particular? If no, are you really sure?

    2) How does comparing ourselves to others hamper our spiritual growth?

    3) How do you boast in God? How have you heard others boast in God?

    Action: Ask God to forgive you when you think too much of yourself, and when you think too little of yourself, and to give you wisdom with both.

  • What Kind of Light is That?

    Psalm 89:4–37, Matthew 5:13–16, Philippians 4:4–9 (read online ⧉)

    Psalm 89 talks about people who walk in the light of the face of God. This is somewhat associated with both Moses having to wear a veil (Exodus 34:29–35 ⧉) and the Levitical blessing (Numbers 6:22–27 ⧉). The light of the face of God is transformative for those who seek to honor, value and glorify God. The psalm talks about the particular people rejoicing in God’s name and being “lifted up” due to God’s righteousness (not their own). God also becomes their strength and protection.

    The Christian thinking that goes along with light, especially when we read the passage in Matthew, is often sloppy. Perhaps it comes from simple, joyous, and fun songs such as, “This Little Light of Mine.” It is partially the individualistic salvation story that we are familiar and comfortable with as Westerners (especially, Americans). It is also this generic term that is often said without really thinking about exactly what “light” means. The Scriptures use light in many ways, so if we are going to be using such a generic “light”, we’d better define it. Yet, we often leave it to, “oh, you know what I mean.” And that, dear Framily, is exactly the problem. In the Western world, religious familiarity (of the useful kind, not antagonism) is fading. We can’t say, “oh, you know what I mean,” anymore, because most people don’t know what you mean!

    Jesus’ City on a Hill parable is based on a historical white stone city on a hill. It shined brightly when it reflected the sun. It couldn’t be hidden. Something so white and on a hill could only hide at night when the moon was covered (clouds, cycle, or orbit). If it has been a long time since you’ve been (or if you have never been) away from city lights, the light of the moon shines on many things. A white city on a hill would shine even in the night, as long as the moon itself was shining. Jesus then commands us to “shine our light” before all humanity! The light we are to shine is not “the light of Jesus”. It is the light of lives transformed by Jesus.

    How does someone show that their life was transformed by Jesus? The passage from Paul’s letter to the Philippians provides some ideas. Some of them might even be counter-Christian-cultural! Rejoice in God always, even when society appears to be going against you. Be gracious to others (just as God was gracious to you). Don’t worry about anything. When you bring requests to God, first be thankful. Oh, and God will give you peace that makes no sense. Then think about and dwell upon good things: truth, honor, just, pure, lovely, commendable. Having a life with these characteristics would definitely make you counter-cultural, often even in the church.

    1) What would be your definition of “being the light,” if you had to explain it to an unbeliever who has never heard from Jesus? Now, think about what you said. Would somebody even listen to it?

    2) What are some other habits/characteristics that you think “shine the light”? Are they your characteristics?

    3) Paul’s list about what to dwell on is often missed by the church. Why do you think that is?

    Action: Add a daily practice to find something positive to dwell on particularly in your family or church.

  • How Desperate Are You?

    Genesis 38:1–26, Ruth 1:3–14, Mark 12:18–27 (read online ⧉)

    Whether it be the situation such as with Judah and Tamar or Ruth or the one proposed by the Sadduccees, most modern American Christians skip over the questions that come up with these passages, as they make them uncomfortable. They are indeed not the idealized “nuclear” American family of husband and wife and 2 kids. It is reasonable that it makes many people uncomfortable, though sometimes (especially with Ruth) we dress it up with similar clothing.

    Initially, Judah’s issue with Tamar was that it seemed his sons would die around her. He didn’t want another son to die. It seems somewhat reasonable. Yet, Judah still knew what was appropriate culturally, and even for his own lineage. It does seem that he planned it. One normally didn’t put a widow back into her father’s house, as it was the father-in-law’s responsibility to assure that children were produced. Something about this was off, for through his actions Judah displayed a cultural disregard for his and his sons’ duties (produce heirs). Culturally, he was highly irresponsible.
    Judah’s behavior also trapped Tamar. She was engaged to a boy who Judah didn’t want to be her husband (regardless of reason). Judah was cruel to her. While her behavior was inappropriate, she was more righteous than Judah, which he acknowledged.* Some Biblical commentators suspect that Judah even started off wrong by “getting” a wife for his son, Er, from someone who was not of his people. If that was the case, Judah would have been an even greater disappointment.

    Ruth is often the one dressed in nuclear family “clothes”. Naomi wanted to send her away (back to her Father’s house, just like Judah did to Tamar). Catch the reasoning. Naomi knew that even were she to remarry and successfully give birth, any sons birthed would not be of age until Ruth was much older. Naomi probably wasn’t optimistic about the remarriage piece either. Naomi, interestingly enough, acted as if she was carrying the burden of her husband and sons to produce heirs. Compare that to Judah who seemed eager to avoid the whole thing.

    While the previous stories have extenuating circumstances, the “test” that the Sadducees bring to Jesus is just plain ridiculous. Of course, reasonableness wasn’t the point of the question, it was to test Jesus. It carried the “law” to its extreme. It is an interesting mental exercise to wonder how this would work. The text implies that the seven marriages were consummated, and the text doesn’t provide a marriage timeline. That seven consummated marriages did not result in a child shows either a non-producing male lineage (a pretty severe one at that) or a truly infertile woman. Yes, this was “just” a test, but at the same time is displays how the desperation of lineage worked.

    As a culture, we have only somewhat recently grown out of that (maybe). The desperation that people felt by not have descendants is beginning to fade. It is especially becoming so today as we lose connection to the people before us. As such, it seems we might be losing something that is deeply connected to that…evangelism. Evangelism is, in many respects, reproduction. Instead of being biological, it is spiritual.

    1) What are your views on evangelism? How is that expressed by your life?

    2) Why do you think we are lukewarm about evangelism? Why are we not as desperate to evangelism as people were to have children?

    3) Many people adopt instead of having biological children. What can they teach us about evangelism?

    Action: Ask God to give you a heart desperate for evangelism.

    *A quick note that Tamar later gave birth to Judah’s twin sons, Zerah and Perez. Perez is in the lineage of Jesus. Yet, another example of how a sin and unrighteous act can be—ultimately—redeemed by Jesus Christ.

  • Same Change, Different Day

    Galatians 1:21–2:10 (read online ⧉)

    The church often states that the message from God has never changed. That’s not entirely accurate. God’s amazing grace was before all and in all. God’s expression of grace was certainly in multiple forms from Adam to Jacob’s (Israel’s) sons. Through Moses, the message changed from a family group to a nation (we often miss this change). The nation and Law was not something we see as grace, yet it took a nation of slaves and transformed them into God’s chosen people. From there grace transformed them into a powerful nation. From there grace kept their identity as God’s people intact, even when they abandoned God, and ended up in other nations. The message always changed. The Truth did not.

    We Christians look at Jesus and the Gospel as the message that never changed. It is possibly more accurate to say that through Jesus and the Gospel that the message was expressed to its fullest. Yes, that is a nuance. However, that nuance is not small in any way, shape, or form. If it was small, Paul wouldn’t have gone to Jerusalem.

    Jesus’ first followers, and his core followers, were Jews. Everything was from a Jewish perspective. For them, therefore, this was a Jewish thing. It makes perfect sense that many would not be able to separate Jewish practices from their Messiah. Hence we ourselves need to be more grace-filled towards those we read about in the New Testament. Remember, they were learning just what all this meant. Paul was pretty sure what it all meant. He just had to convince others.

    This is a long preface to a new and old truth. Mode and method do not equal message. Not too long ago, we had church splits over worship music. Mostly, that’s over, though some still complain about one sort of music or the other. There is the comparisons between contemporary format (which all Generations Sunday services have) and “traditional” liturgical services. It seems so obvious to many now that these are merely different ways to still share the Gospel and gather together. Now there are digital churches. Then there are microexpression churches. This form of church caters to a specific interest group or demographic. Is it bad? In many respects, yes, for it continues the “one hour on Sunday is the most segregated hour of the week.” Granted, it is often no longer over race. It does reach people who would not otherwise be reached by “normal” church.

    The church has long needed to reinvent itself, perhaps not so much to reach new people (though that really does help), but to reinvigorate itself. The church seems to have entered a period of stagnation. Either the stagnation needs to be flushed out, or the church can suffocate. It seems harsh, yet in many respects that is exactly what Paul had to deal with. The church that was forming had to reinvent itself. It had to separate itself from the ways that kept in mired in the past. Once it broke free, the freeing message of the Gospel got wings.

    1) Why do people hold onto traditions? How do you know when a tradition is stagnate, and when it is life-giving?

    2) What “how church is done” thing do you hold onto? Why? How does it give you life?

    3) What is one “new” church thing that you enjoyed and/or found life-giving once you actually started doing it?

    Action: Take your “church thing” and explain not only what it is, but also how it builds up the church and fellow Christians.