Devotion.al

Tag: giving

  • Depths of Lent

    Depths of Lent

    Psalm 119:9–16; Isaiah 44:1–8; Acts 2:14–24

    has various aspects. The first is our mortality (“from dust you came; to dust you return”). The second is . Mortality and sin are connected. Without the original sin, there would be no . Sin brought death to Creation.

    From there, to some degree, sin is broken into original sin (that which brought death into Creation), and personal sin. Personal sin is often what we confront when it comes to Lent. This that sin which personally maintains separation from ourselves and God. More importantly, it is us through our sin that maintains that gap. The known end of Lent is , the commemoration of when God died to bridge the chasm of between God and man. This makes our personal sin all the more tragic.

    Lent will often include some sort of spiritual that is usually a “giving up” of something. There was a time when it was primarily meat (still is in Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic communities). As that was in a time where meat was in short supply already, there is some question as to how “sacrificial” it was. Now we think in terms of news, social media, phones (that would nice), , alcohol (for those who drink), a meal (not just meat). All this with the intent, though rarely practices, to instead use that time to approach the throne of God.

    Lent is really a time of pretend. That’s not mean in a bad way. In many respects, we blessed so much that it is hard to lament or mourn because we know what’s on the other side of Good Friday. Many of us have such a life of ease, that we don’t understand just how important God’s words are to the broken.

    We are not just talking about the Christian-ese of the “lost” or the “wayward” or the “not-yet Christian” or the “cold to Christ”. We are talking about people abandoned and lost. As much as this may grate on you, this includes people fleeing to the US from their native country. While there are some who are truly not doing this to become a part of the US people, the majority are giving up (and gave up) everything for a sliver of a hope to become something new.

    That hope, as small as it often is, is that same sort of redemptive hope and life hope that God had promised to the Israelites for generations. That is the hope in the darkness that Lent exemplifies. Unless we have been in a dark place, any understanding of hope in the face of despair is an intellectual exercise lacking depth.

    To not take this as dismissive. This is coming from the depths of my own ‘s darkness these last few weeks. Certainly, not the darkest, but only by a few shades. As I look at that, I understand even then how much I cannot comprehend the depth and breadth and length of the despair of Israel, that was answered by the depth and breadth and length of God’s redemptive love.

    ※Reflection※

    What life experience can you use to relate to the hope in despair of Israel?

    ※※

    Jesus, thank you for walking the road of the cross for us. May we pick up our cross and follow you. Amen.

  • Given

    Given

    Psalm 51:1–12; Exodus 30:1–10; Hebrews 4:14–5:4

    Even if every single Israelite behaved completely within the bounds of Law, and thus no offerings were offered for an entire year…still Aaron would have to perform the ritual of reconciliation. No matter how perfect every Israelite was, reconciliation was still needed.

    In the of the Nazarene (and similarly in other holiness denominations such as the Free Methodist, Wesleyan, Methodist, Church of God in Christ (Anderson), and ) we have a concept of Entire . This is not as universal in understanding as it could be, yet it is (ultimately) being like Jesus Christ insofar as we have been enabled by the (and, yes, this is far more complicated and much simpler). This is a high standard. Others have defined it as oneself wholly over to Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit (different ways of explaining it).

    By the Law, even if every single being were Entirely Sanctified, the purification offering for reconciliation would still be required. To many, Entire Sanctification is entirely impossible (and it is without the Holy Spirit). Yet, even were it possible to the many, the offering was still needed.

    That is the weight of the Law. It isn’t all the offerings needed to cover our sin. It isn’t all the festivals to celebrate and recognize God’s miracles and saving works. The weight is the that we can do nothing to ourselves.

    As the author of Hebrews is unknown (plenty of speculation), we don’t really have an idea of their perspective or history. Yet, it seems that he (assumption) was a Jew. It wouldn’t surprise me, based upon sections like this, that he was from some sort of priestly background. As such, the Law and the symbols of the Temple would be significant to him.

    To the author of Hebrews, Jesus was the ultimate High Priest. Due to Jesus’ eternal nature, Jesus was always acting as the reconciling sacrifice. Though only a sacrifice once, that sacrifice resounds throughout Creation.

    Like the earthly High Priest, Jesus was tempted and therefore understands our frailties. Unlike the High Priest, Jesus did not yield to the temptations, and thus does not need to offer sacrifices. Through Christ, then, the weight of the Law is removed, for the reconciliation is done and remains done for eternity.

     

    ※Reflection※

    • Most of us (as non-Jews) do not understand the weight of the Law. With your understanding, what “weight” would you come up with to explain this to another?
    • What is one thing you do every year that weighs you down or overwhelms you? How might that be similar to the “weight” of the Law and how might it be different?

     

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, we are unable to fully grasp the chasm between your holiness and our fallenness. Thank you for crossing the chasm for us and aiding us in being to you. May our hearts and lives reflect it. Amen.

  • Life Giving God

    Life Giving God

    Isaiah 46:1–13

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    ※Reflection※

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

    ※Prayer※

    God, thank you for your life-giving nature. May we embrace all that it means. Amen.

  • Walk Out Your Faith

    Galatians 5:2–15

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Being grace-filled is counter-cultural. It has been for quite some time. Being grace-filled is not being a doormat, it is giving people what they don’t deserve…God’s love.

    Read the scriptures for this devotional on BibleGateway.com
    • If you were asked to live out your faith in grace, what would that look like?
    • How does living out grace work with those with whom you ?
    • If you were to choose grace or rules, which would it be? Which does your display?

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, let your grace flow in, through, and out of us more and more. Amen.

  • We Love Talking About It

    We Love Talking About It

    1 Samuel 15:7–15; Acts 5:1–11

    Every pastor’s favorite sermon topic is tithing/. Every pastor absolutely loves talking about you are to freely to God by giving to the church and other missional activities.

    In case you’re wondering, that was sarcasm. Most pastor’s hate it. And, most people hate hearing it, because they often feel guilty about it. Hatred of the topic may be a veneer over the fear of Christianly dealing with .

    John Wesley had a famous sermon on money. From it was gained a saying, “…Gain all you can…Save all you can…Give all you can….” Part of the problem with this saying is all the “…” that are part of it. They show that there is far more than just these 12 words. The context of each set of 4 words makes a lot of difference in how one interprets them.

    “All you can” is the real crux of the issue. “All you can” at what cost? John Wesley had a distinct moral code regarding “Gain all you can.” Some of today’s business owners might be okay. Others might not. Still others would not be able to figure it out.

    John Wesley was concerned that people who sought to gain would do it at the expense of others. In many respects, we could capitalism with a . On the other hand, we could view it as capitalism with a long view for the benefit of humanity.

    If the long view of a business, and its profit, is for the benefit of humanity, that’s a good start. Destroying the environment would be harming God’s , so it would fail Wesley’s test, too. Much of our modern profiting, though, is a lot grayer.

    Saving is the next thing. Saving is not hoarding. Saving is more along the lines of protection of the wellbeing of one’s family and self. Hoarding is gathering as much as one can and preventing others from gaining.

    In John Wesley’s era, far too many people owed money. It was a way of life. For some, it was the only way to feed their families. Today we think of credit card debt, home mortgages, student loans, and car loans. The amount of most of those loans could have been greatly reduced with good and a willingness to delay gratification. This is (for example) one area that the Church could be both a better witness of and of .

    “Give all you can” can be a guilt trip. Often, even those of us in the Wesley tradition use it or perceive it as more of a guilt scale. Wesley, while big on charity, didn’t seem to be particularly guilt-driven. However, by some accounts, he failed the “save all you can” for his family, for he gave all he could.

    Gain(earn)/save/give is a balancing act.

    Many Christians are like Saul. “Oh, I’ll give the difficult or unwanted stuff to God.” Sounds like many people who give broken stuff to a church. The church then often must pay to dispose of it. Saul turned a commandment from God into we’ll benefit, oh, and maybe God will like a little bit, too.

    The path of Ananias and Sapphira was “look at what we did. We gave everything (oh, except that part we kept back).” They wanted the accolades about the total sacrifice, rather than just giving freely and joyfully. If they’d given 90% and kept 10% and were honest about it, everything would have been fine.

    Far too many preachers (and non-profit type) folks speak about a person’s checkbook as the litmus test. It isn’t. It would be nice if the 10% rule (from the time of Israel) had been sufficient. It wasn’t. When a person has a rule (10%), the heart doesn’t have to go along.

     It is the motive behind our use of money that is the point of tithing and giving.

    God created the world. God already has the money (as if God needed it). God wants our heart.

    ※Reflection※

    • When a church or non-profit person starts talking about money, what’s your first response? How about an entrepreneur, investor, banker, or politician?
    • What is so captivating about money and stuff?

    ※Prayer※

    Jesus, may you be the Lord of our heart. May the spirit of mammon in us be overwhelmed and transformed by the sanctification of . Amen.

  • Purple Vision

    Purple Vision

    Numbers 27:15–23; 2 Timothy 2:8–13

    Having worked for family-owned and -run businesses, I know that one of the business’ concerns is, who’s next? Perhaps it might be better to say that the of a family-owned and -run business is who will successfully lead it with and tenacity once the current leadership steps down.

    I have seen it work well. I have seen it work not-so-well. One business had a plan, and the other business made laissez-faire assumptions.

    Moses had spent a lot of time getting the Israelites to the Promised Land. He had been frustrated, belittled, and probably cursed by the same Israelites. He still wanted them to succeed in the Promised Land. So, Moses asked God for the next leader.

    God selected Joshua. Now, it could be said that this was obvious, as other than Aaron, only Joshua is noted as Moses’ aide, and even accompanied Moses when he received the Ten Commandments. Joshua, as Moses’ aide, indeed saw the dark side of leading the Israelites.

    I think it is appropriate to presume that God had guided Moses’ selection of Joshua, thus make Joshua the “obvious” choice. On the other hand, we could also presume that Moses’ experience in Pharaoh’s house would have taught Moses how to choose a leader, and then God used that.

    Who was next to lead would set the Israelites for success or failure in the Promised Land.

    In some respects, that is the same view many people have of the incoming Presidential administration and the Congressional seating. Success or failure. In a republic, it’s a little harder to really hit that success or failure button (though pundits try).

    As we look at the days, months, and years to follow this election, we all need to ask ourselves about a few things. For the last few election cycles, the country has been color-coded with red and blue. The animosity between red and blue is approaching that of the Bloods and Crypts from decades ago, who differentiate themselves by red or blue.

    Wearing the wrong colors in the wrong neighborhood was a recipe for being harmed by the other gang’s members. Now people are being assaulted by the “opposing” group just for wearing t-shirts, hats, or participating in their constitutionally protected right to protest.

    There has been a centrist movement calling itself “purple”. However, there is something ironic in that. This mix of red and blue representation of republic political alignment has a completely different meaning…royalty.

    Theoretically, the War of Independence was intended to “free” the American colonies from the oppression of British royalty. Instead, we developed an elected aristocracy.

    There is one good thing, though, about the purple. Who we recognize as royalty, who we recognize as king makes all the difference. When we recognize and believe the Jesus Christ is King, we can gladly declare ourselves purple, for we seek to follow the True King.

    ※Reflection※

    What will it take, do you think, for conversations on to be purple first, rather than last? What is one behavior or conversation of yours was not purple during this recent political season? How can you develop a practice of purple thoughts and , rather than red or blue?

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, you are the King of the Universe. Through you, came into being. Only you are of our worship and . Thank you for us the freedom to choose. Thank you for loving us enough so that through the , we can become wise. Amen.

  • Yieldingly Strong

    Yieldingly Strong

    Malachi 1:6–14; 1 Peter 2:1–10

    Many years ago, there was a Star Trek show called Voyager. Overall, I don’t remember much about it, but I do recall this scene between Neelix (guest alien onboard) and Tuvok (i.e., Vulcan, humorless, emotionless, kind of like a robot):

    NEELIX: These are Keela flowers. Beautiful, and remarkably strong. The stem is flexible, impossible to break. But occasionally on the same plant there’s a bloom whose stem is not so flexible. Ah, here’s one. And when the stem is brittle, it breaks.

    TUVOK: You’re saying that the Maquis crew is rigid and inflexible. That they will never adjust to Starfleet rules.

    NEELIX: No, Mister Vulcan, I’m saying that you are rigid and inflexible, but maybe if you’d learn to bend a little, you might have better luck with your class. Those Maquis aren’t Starfleet cadets. You can’t treat them the same way. Get to know them, try to find out what they’re like inside. You might discover a better teaching method.

    “Learning Curve”, Original Airdate: May 22, 1995 (Stardate -327613). Thanks to www.chakoteya.net for the transcript.

    The Maquis were an insurrection/guerilla group. Their methods of instruction and obedience were not the military-style of Starfleet. Tuvok learned one way. He taught one way. Rigidly.

    However, the Maquis were just as rigid. It was just that they rigidly didn’t want to be like Starfleet

    What on earth (or in space) does this have to do with these passages?

    According to Peter, we are the priesthood of all believers. I may have a certain role within that priesthood (as an ordained person). You have one too.

    The ultimate purpose of the priests is the be the intercessors between “the people” and God. For Christians, “the people” are the world that does not yet believe in Jesus Christ.

    The priests, however, have their own with God. In our case (the collective Christian case), we are called to give of ourselves: , time, talent, and so on. It’s too rigid to say it is “required”. On the other hand, it is a spiritual discipline.

    When we do not give of ourselves, or we do it grudgingly, we are the ones called out by Malachi deformed useless sacrifice for the sake of a check .

    In regard to our Christian , there is a rigidity in sacrifice. That is one of the aspects of a mature Christian, self-sacrifice. It’s odd to say it is not required; on the other hand, it is essential.

    The flexibility, however, is in how it works out. You could be gifted with teaching, encouragement, , or something else. Freedom from the Law is how we are free to to God and to through .

    ※Reflection※

     The question for you isn’t, are you gifted? The question is, what are you gifted in? The next question is like it; how will you use that for the community of believers around you?

    ※Prayer※

    Creator, you have made each of us different so that only together can reflect your infinite love. Amen.

  • Dripping Prayer

    Dripping Prayer

    Proverbs 27:15–16; Luke 11:5–14; Luke 18:1–8

    Persistence is often a good thing. However, blind persistence can also be incredibly limiting. As my younger children are about to begin their college journey (yes, still a few months to go), I look back to my time in college. I chose a major I wasn’t skilled at. I chose a major that I would not be successful at.

    I chose the wrong major for a dream. For 4 years I pursued that major. The result? Another school, another (bad) major, and finally dropping out of college.

    But I was persistent, and I was a fool.*

    There is no doubt that some people find great in being persistent. What is often not recognized in that is their innate skill, , or support, which can make all the difference.

    Sometimes the persistence can be like a drip on a rainy day. You can’t get the sound out of your head, even though you “know” your roof is good. It beats on your head and in your . Sometimes it tricks you into thinking that your roof really is leaking.

    While the nagging wife could be considered persistent. That kind of persistence (whether it be wife, husband, mother, father, whomever) is generally destructive. It destroys hearts, souls, minds, , lives. That’s not good persistence.

    Persistent is different. Whether it’s the story of the friend or the story of the widow, the goal may originate with the self, but there are positive forces at play. In the case of the friend, hospitality is actually center stage. In the case of the widow, is at the center.

    We often focus on the people in the stories, and not the greater “ethos” that the story surrounds.

    Persistent prayer is not nagging prayer. Nagging God to get you a Rolls Royce would not be positive persistence. Persistent prayer for justice for our neighbors? Persistent prayer for their finances and spiritual health?

    Often, we will dress up our persistent prayer in “Godly” language, such as, “ me wealth that I may be more generous.” This can be positive. It is often quite negative, as the person is operating from a scarcity mindset, rather than generosity mindset

    Other times it could be, “Lord, let them get a speeding ticket.” The justice might be correct; the heart motivation might well be revenge or desire for their punishment.

    Persistent prayer may involve the self. even tells us that we are to bring our cares and needs to the Father.

    ※Questions※

    1) How would you define the difference between stubbornness, nagging, and persistence? How do you know when you are being one or the other?

    2) What are some signs or language that you can use to determine the intent behind our prayer (i.e., justice versus vengeance)?

    3) If God is in answering prayer, why do we not always get what we want?

    ※Prayer※

    Lord, may our prayers be full of your life- water rather than torrential waters of destruction; to lift up your people and the world to you. Amen.

    *Just for clarity, the fool part is my stubbornness regarding my major pursuit. Without that second college, I wouldn’t have found my wife; so, that part is a win. I did eventually go back to college and complete a degree. It just took a bit longer.