Devotion.al

Tag: Gospel

  • Gospel Politics

    John 8:31–59, Acts 13:46–52 (read online ⧉)

    One of the biggest struggles we—as Christians in America—continue to face, and will face even more deeply, is the hardness of heart to the . This will include people who identify themselves as Christians. As it becomes harder to be a cultural Christian, the pressure to not be a Christian at all will continue to . Yes, it is sad. We became complacent and comfortable, which rarely produces a life- Gospel. We ought to really read the Gospel accounts, and even Acts and the Epistles where we are the Jews (including Pharisees and Sadducees) and the Judaizers.

    Currently, Jesus’ is growing most quickly in places where Christianity is often opposed or co-opted by the government (becoming a false Gospel and church in the process). People not part of “the West” are the of which we read. We, “the West”, have become what we thought we overcame. You might immediately protest this. It’s not bad to protest this. However, as we look at how the church family has been split between 2 political parties, we can see that our understanding of following Jesus Christ has become twisted.

    Most politicians are practical with their politics. They will commit (or at least pretend) to what will get them votes. Theirs is not, by practice, a Gospel of love. There are “planks” in both political parties that Christians should support. However, if it were an all-or-none supporting the entirety of a political party’s platform (and this would even include those outside the normal two), all Christians would probably—if they remained true to the teachings of Jesus Christ—have to stop voting. This isn’t solely an American thing either. This is the reality in most democracies/republics. No one political party will agree with all the teachings of Jesus. Yet, we have people focusing on political parties and politicians, and not on Jesus Christ.

    We are the Jews. We have become partners with the State. We have even gone so far as to demonize others that call themselves Christians as if our own house is clean, as if we are God, being able to judge (more like condemn) the heart of another person.

    John tells us that the Jews, not being able to stand against Jesus, called him a Samaritan (in other words, he wasn’t a “real” Jew) and demon-possessed! Wow! What chuztpah! We are hearing that from Christians that person is not a “real” American, “real” Christian, “”, “deluded”, and so on. THE WORLD JUDGES US BY THE WORDS WE USE. Look at the words we are using against each other. These are the same that sing, “blessed be the of the Lord!”

    As Western “civilization” walks and runs away from Christianity, there are still plenty of people waiting to the good news of Jesus Christ. Many of them are far away. Many of them are right next door.

    1) What ways can you think of to take the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the world? Look at each of those ways. Will the world actually listen to them? Why or why not?

    2) One of the tendencies of the Jewish leaders was to say, “come to us.” In what ways do modern Christians do the same? In what ways are modern Christians different?

    3) Politics is a very sore and volatile subject these days. How can we still use politics to share the and grace of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

  • Is That Light You’re Hiding?

    Exodus 10:21–23, Mark 4:21–25, John 5:31–35 (read online ⧉)

    Jesus is the of the world. While Jesus bringing and was light, being the spiritual light was part of Jesus’ very being. As he was one with the and Holy , and as God is the giver of spiritual light, and the creator of light, then saying Jesus is the Light of the world misses other times when God made light as a symbol of salvation.

    The “adventure” of the 10 plagues was nearing is zenith. The “plague” of darkness, like a number of the other plagues, only affected the Egyptians, and left the Hebrews in Goshen alone. Just as with those plagues, God was separating the Hebrews from the Egyptians. God was making a point. While this is only a single “plague”, it still shows that light can be associated with God. In fact, some use the sun as symbolic representation of the (though there are significant theological issues with that if used poorly or scientifically).

    From a scientific standpoint, without the sun, there would be no biological life. The sun with its heat and light are essential to the well-being of all life on the planet. With God, the spiritual light, there is no life of God within us. So, what do we say to those who do not believe in God? The Image of God is within them, and they can deny it all they want. We all have just a touch of God’s light.

    When we read the passage in Mark, we often associate “the light” with light of salvation that is inside us, because of a similar passage in Matthew 5. Yet, is that really what Mark thinks Jesus is talking about? Different writers can have different understandings of what happened, just as we see in trials where witnesses are called. There is a reason you have more than 1 or 2 witnesses. What if, instead of our light, Mark believes Jesus is talking about God’s light? Yes, it is a nuanced difference. However, many people do seem to be trying to quench the light of God.

    There is also a truth that Jesus conveys in John. Often people are attracted to the light, but only because it is bright and shiny. Businesses, churches, construction crews, concert teams, and many use bright lights to catch your attention. The hope is to draw you in. The bright and shiny lights only work so long though. Eventually, you have to commit to something.

    1) What, if anything, is the difference between God’s light and God’s light in you?

    2) In Matthew 5, Jesus talks about hiding our light. If Mark is talking about hiding God’s light, what do these passages tell us about people and God? How can encourage people to not hide the light?

    3) Why do you think people hide the light? Can you think of deeper reasons for that?

    : Look for something in your life that is hiding the light, and uncover it.

  • Same Change, Different Day

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

    The often states that the message from God has never changed. That’s not entirely accurate. God’s amazing 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 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, 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 Jewish practices from their Messiah. Hence we ourselves need to be more grace-filled towards those we read about in the New Testament. , 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 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 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 “” 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?

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

  • Posture of Power

    1 Corinthians 2:1–5, Ephesians 3:14–19 (read online ⧉)

    Power makes a difference. We all acknowledge that. Whether it is political power, military power, law enforcement power, boss power, parental power, and even spouse power. Power is a part of every . Even in of equality, power will always be there.

    Often people will use the power of to throw their weight around. This would be the concept of name-dropping, whether it’s saying you “know” a person, or you “work” for a person, both mean that you are “dropping” hints at the power you are associated with.

    It is well within the norms of human behavior to use power to convince people to listen and believe. While we suppose the gentle art of persuasion isn’t about power, it actually is. Persuasion is built around people giving someone the power to their minds. Yes, this is an oversimplification. It is far more complicated than that, yet, the underlying truth that power is involved even there remains.

    When reminds the Corinthians of how he convinced them of the truth of the Gospel, he notes that he didn’t use rhetorical flourishes, great wit, or proof of his vast knowledge and/or intellect. He convinced them by his life. Often (but historically inaccurate), St. Francis is attributed with the following, “preach the Gospel at all times, use words if necessary.” While it is a great pithy statement, it’s a horrible practice. Yet, as Paul demonstrates, there is truth in it. Paul didn’t stop preaching and speaking the Gospel or not live it out, he was just humble. He was a deliberate partner in the work of the , and did what Paul was to do, and left it to the to do what the Holy Spirit would do.

    Paul often comes across as arrogant and demanding. However, perhaps we ought to see it as an earthly who seeks the best for his children, even if they don’t like it. Paul’s posture of humility is portrayed to the Ephesians as an almost begging position for his spiritual children in Ephesus (and all the places he went). He wanted them to be filled with the power of God, not the power of humankind. Do you see what he’s really praying for? The power that he’s praying for on their behalf is the power to fully comprehend how much God loves them, then they would be filled completely with and for God.

    1) How often have you experienced people using earthly power in the guise (or disguise) of Holy power?

    2) Often people will use false humility to convince or control. How would you tell the difference between false and true humility?

    3) Why is learning and recognizing the use of power critical to the future of the ?

  • Speaking of Children

    Psalm 131, Matthew 18:1–9, Matthew 19:13–15 (read online ⧉)

    As adults, many of us look at the carefree nature of many kids and wish we had that now (especially if it was taken from us). Our general society has increasingly put barriers of protection around children, while at the same time put more burdens on them. It’s rather strange when you think about it. Then the prioritization of those burdens can also be unhealthy. Teenagers are limited to a certain number of hours (and a certain number of days per week) to work and earn a wage. On the other hand, if a teenager is playing a sport, they can spend as much (and often more) time supporting a sport than earning a wage. By and large, most of those children will not play sports professionally or even collegiately, yet there is a preference for certain play versus work. This is not to say sports dedication is necessarily bad, just that there seems to be a level of hypocrisy.

    Part of that is our understanding of children and childhood. We can see some of this very tension within the . Depending on how one defines weened, a weened child was anywhere from 2 to 4 years old. However, as the child aged, we start to see an odd tension. Around the of 13, a male went through the Bar Mitzvah and females the Bat Mitzvah. We see an allusion to this in Luke 2:41–52 (though was 12). At that point, a child became responsible in regards to the Law and theoretically had attained majority status. Yet, “men” were not counted in the Old Testament until they were 20. As Judaism (and the Law, and Israelite custom) are the ancestor of Christianity, these ages are important to consider when we look at the Scriptures when children are involved, as these are the background of the writers of both New and Old Testaments.

    From a Greek , a child is anyone prior to puberty (or that what the general use of the ). While the Greek was the language used to write Matthew, Jewish and thinking would still deeply affect the intent of and influence the writer.

    This is a very long way of saying, no one knows how old the child in question was, but likely it was up to 5 or 6. In other words, weened but not “there” yet insofar as being a teenager.

    When Jesus presents the child as a perspective example, it is likely that the perspective (if not the words) of Psalm 131 were in play, and would certainly fit a pre-adolescent person. The child, as defined by Psalm 131, does “…not get involved with things too great or too wondrous…” What could that mean? It could mean many things. However, if we look at (for example) the English language, some counts put its vocabulary at over 1 million words, but when the King James Bible was the estimate was 20-40 thousand. The reason this is brought up is that our language, just in words, is complicated, and only growing more so. We add words in an attempt to provide nuance. Not a particular surprise as written language does not succinctly communicate emotion, background, and overtone well.

    In other words, we are making our language seemingly “great and wondrous”, and really making a mess of it. The Great Commandments (summarized: God; love ) is simple. We make it so complicated.

    1) Do you think complicated thinking is why Jesus presented a child as an example? Do you think it might be another reason?

    2) Why does complicated thinking make it hard to share the about Jesus?

    3) What do you think of the 2 versions of adult presented above? Can you think of similar examples in our society? Why do you think these differences in “adult” are trying to achieve?

  • Back To The Dark

    2 Chronicles 24:17–22, Matthew 10:17–22, Acts 6:8–15, Acts 7:51–59 (read online ⧉)

    Yesterday was only Christmas and here we are back into the of the world. How true to that is. A baby is born and a feels joy. In the midst of that joy, there are concerns about food, shelter, . There can even be concerns such as disease or college. While a new life begins, other lives continue. In some respects, it is dishonest to always talk about the baby, because everyone else is just as important. When we are talking about , things are a little different, but the reality is that Mary and Joseph still had their lives to deal with. For example, the whole reason they were in Bethlehem was to be registered. Once they were registered, the Roman government was going to tax them accordingly. Sounds great, doesn’t it? It does sound like real life. That doesn’t mean we have to enjoy the darkness, nor does it mean we have to accept it as inevitable. It is however reality.

    Joash had been a good king with a singularly great and God-honoring advisor, Chief Priest Jehoida. Despite Joash’s obedience and Jehoida’s piety, the followers of other gods jumped into an advisory role with Jehoida’s death. As with much of Scripture, we don’t have the entire story. There was likely family and in the midst of it. There was also some hopeful and blind optimism which lead to thinking that all would be well. It wasn’t. Who knows how quickly Judah fell back into apostasy: days, months, years. God sent prophets to guide the people (especially the king) back to the right road, but they all failed. That God sent Zechariah—who would have likely had a significant place in Joash’s life—as a prophet tells us how serious God was. Joash, for whatever reason, sealed his apostasy and the fate of Judah by stoning him at the temple of God. The act that was to be used upon those opposed to God was instead used by them against a man of God.

    Jesus knowing his future and knowing the past history of Judah wasn’t really predicting much. If Jesus’ disciples were faithful, they would be persecuted. When Jesus talks about the fracturing of the family perhaps he had in mind Jehoida, Joash, and Zechariah, who were (from our perspective) . At least, they should have been, and that is what the Scriptures guide us to concluding. The framily of king and prophet that should have been , were divided and ultimately destroyed.

    Not too much later, Stephen was killed. As he was in his , it is possible that some of those who stoned him had been Jewish friends or family. For what was he brought to trial? Performing signs and winning arguments. So, he was falsely accused of blasphemy. Why was he killed? Because he claimed to see Jesus sitting at the right hand of God. The right and wrong lines between Joash and Zechariah are much firmer and better defined than those between Stephen and his accusers. We know that the Jewish (especially at that time) understanding of what it meant to follow God was wrong. However, unlike Joash they were not advocating for a different God. It was an understanding of God that was the issue.

    This difference of understanding applies to us today. The Western church is going through a series of upheavals. Sadly, the world watches and laughs. These upheavals are necessary, though. The church needs to discover (in some cases) and rediscover (in other ones) what it means to be a Christian in a non-Christian world. Much of these upheavals will allow us to understand ourselves better. The reason this is critical for the church is that we will be returning to the times of persecution in the Western world. No, we are not quite there, but it will come. The church needs to be ready, and a lot of being ready will require the shedding of a lot of ancient weight. It also will probably require us to pick-up ancient ways long discarded. Lastly, it will require us to learn a new language with which to share the Gospel. The message doesn’t change, just the method and the language.

    1) Do you think Joseph and Mary were concerned the day after Jesus’ birth, or were they still enjoying the moment? Why?

    2) Today’s passages are actually historical church decision (i.e., the lectionary). Why do you think the observation of Stephen’s martyrdom follows Christmas Day?

    3) Family and framily squabbles and fights are usually the ones that hurt the most. Why is that? How does impact the Gospel?

  • Bridal Restoration

    Psalm 51, John 3:27–29 (read online ⧉)

    This Psalm is the result of a person’s . This is not to say that the Psalm is about the sin per se, but about a person standing before God after being confronted about the sin. While there is a lot of symbolism in the Psalm the symbols reflect a that recognizes the wrong done. Note there are no excuses. It is what it is. How many times have you confessed a sin and then surrounded it with excuses? What is interesting here is that a request to hear is made. This is not a request to be able to make a joyful noise. This is a request—a plea—to hear God’s joy in , and the joy of those who surround God. The Psalm makes a turn from repentance and sorrow to, basically, asking to not be cast away from God’s .

    While there is a penalty that goes along with what was done, restoration was still completed. There was joy again. Often we cannot find joy because there is something in our hearts that keeps out of the presence of God. Whether that something resulted in shame or sin or what have you, something may indeed be keeping you from even going toward the presence of God.

    John the Baptist alludes to and his bride in this short passage from the of John. Who is Jesus’ bride? The church. Who is the church? We all are. John is filled with joy that the (whom John calls his friend) gets the bride! Jesus’ marriage as the joyful culmination of his ministry. What makes this interesting, too, is that the marriage is a “not yet” scenario. That means that while John the Baptist is speaking in the present, John (the writer of the Gospel) is looking toward the , when Jesus returns.

    1) Why does John the Baptist tie joy to the marriage of the groom (Jesus)?

    2) How can we say that joy is or complete in marriage in the light of the tensions in our own marriages, and the divorces that ravage the church and the world?

    3) How could being or not being in God’s presence affect your joy?

  • Bridal Party

    Matthew 25:1–13 (read online ⧉)

    This is an odd parable. It makes some sense on the surface, but even then, not much. One of the surface tensions is that refers here to the of God. Jesus often refers to the Kingdom having already come, but here it is in the . Some scholars struggle with the tension of now and not yet, however, that tension is quite common in the New Testament, and it shouldn’t be any surprise here.
    Jesus immediately turns to a common tactic in such parables, dividing the subjects into wise and . This, of course, sets the stage for the unfolding of the parable. Sadly, antisemitic tendencies have often divided the foolish as Jews and the wise as Christians. That wasn’t Jesus’ intent based on the . He’s usually a little more obvious, and the writers are usually quick to tell us when he’s talking about certain people when Jesus doesn’t say it. As we don’t have that, let’s agree to not read that into this.

    This really is straightforward, right? Be , for the Day of the Lord will be coming, and you don’t know when! That’s the point, it seems, of the story. However, (you knew this was coming, didn’t you?), we seem to be missing someone.

    We have the . It’s pretty safe, based on the Scriptures, that this could be considered Jesus himself. We have the wise and foolish virgins. Now, Jesus is not having multiple wives. That isn’t it at all. The allusion is to a bridal march, where the virgin (or young unmarried women) would escort the to the groom’s home, where the ceremony would be done, and things would become official. If it happened at night, as in the parable, the bride’s escorts (i.e., bridesmaids) would light the way. So, have you guessed who is missing?

    The bride. We talk so much about the bridesmaids (granted, they are the “stars” of the story) that we forget about the bride. Even as we talk about who was foolish or wise and why we missed the bride! So, who is the bride? Well, if Jesus is the groom, then the is the bride.

    1) If the church is the bride, who are the wise and foolish bridesmaids (keeping in mind our agreement above)?

    2) If Jesus is the Groom and the Church is the Bride, where is the marriage ceremony held?

    3) If Jesus is the Groom and the Church is the Bride, who announces the approaching groom?