Devotion.al

Tag: Holy Spirit

  • Restoring Broken Bones

    Deuteronomy 30:1–6, Matthew 18:15–20, Galatians 6:1–10

    In his commentary on this section of Galatians, Earle Wilson wrote, “The is a , not a civic or social club. As a family we are knit supernaturally by the Holy in common fellowship of . It is in this context that admonished us to carry one another’s burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ.”

    At Generations Church, we talk a lot about framily—friends who are like family. The question then becomes, is that who we are? Is this how we are really identified? Is this how we live out the call to be framily? How do we as individuals and collectively truly begin to internalize and live it out fully?

    is an essential piece of as framily. However, for something to be restored, something has to be broken and acknowledged as broken. We are all broken in some way. We can be too confident in our learning, too confident in our family, too confident in our state, too confident in our country, and definite too confident in ourselves.

    Are we still keeping up appearances? Are we still putting on our “church” face? Are we working so hard that we are blind to where the is actually working?

    We are each too scared at times to be truly transparent and vulnerable. Oversharing can be chaotic and emotionally draining, so we cannot take it too far. However, sometimes a broken bone needs to be re-broken so that it heals correctly. Are there bones in our framily that need this?

  • Finding Faults

    Psalm 104, Ezekiel 18:1-32, John 9:1–11

    Original is the corruption of the God-given original nature of all the offspring of Adam. This corrupted base has an aversion to God, has no spiritual , and is inclined to . Until the fully cleanses us, original sin continues to exist even in the new life of the regenerate. Original sin differs from actual (i.e., personal) sin as it is an orientation to actual sin for which no one is accountable until they have reached a morally aware state.*

    This is an important concept to have in mind as we read this passage in Ezekiel. We can gather a couple of things here, (1) that people were blaming their parents (and ancestors) for their troubles, (2) that is was a corporate responsibility, not a personal one, and (3) that people were not taking responsibility for their actions. What is troubling is that this developed outside of the Law. Whether it was a cultural thing or something that developed over time is not all that clear, but what is clear is that there needed to be a significant spiritual shift among the exiles.

    And there was such a shift among many. They returned, confessed, repented, and mourned. Despite having the prophet’s words, is confronted by the exact same thought process. Now, we understand that the blind man was born blind. He was not responsible for his blindness. So, the default setting has become (again) the parents (or ancestors) fault.

    1) One of the common tendencies of people is to look for blame or fault. Why do you think that is? What does blame- or fault-finding result with?

    2) Authenticity is a big buzzword these days. When confessing sins or errors, though, do people really want to be authentic? What would it mean to you to have a safe place (and people) to ?

    3) How does always looking for fault work against us? What is the opposite of fault-finding?

    *Yes, that is a whole lot of theology (sorry), and if you want to see what the practiced theologians say, see Article 5 of the of the Nazarene’s Articles of . I hope I summarized it adequately.

  • Hearing Truth

    Psalm 25, Jeremiah 7:21–34, John 16:7–15, Ephesians 4:15–16

    The wounds of a friend are trustworthy,
    but the kisses of an enemy are excessive.
    Proverbs 27:6

    can be a painful thing. If delivered in the context of true friendship, the of the truth is shared by both. One of the hardest things to do is to be honest with truth, and to be humble and to accept it.
    Jeremiah delivered God’s message to the Israelites. It was Truth. In their pride and arrogance, they disregarded it. Instead of properly viewing Jeremiah as God’s prophet—the messenger of God’s seeking of their —they viewed him as an irritant, and someone not to be listened to. Of course, they really chose to not listen to God. It’s not as if God hadn’t already tried. It wasn’t as if God hadn’t already set the expectations. It is not as if God didn’t, even now, continue to try convincing them to . Raise a sad song of mourning (a dirge). God wasn’t happy. God was mourning. The Truth delivered caused at least as much pain to God, as to God’s people.

    We have been called to Truth. We have to unwind ourselves from the lies, however, and the number of lies are overwhelming. Perhaps we shouldn’t call them lies. Many are truth and facts. However, throwing truths and facts out in an attempt to bury the Truth, makes them all lies. While Christianity feels as if it is against the world (and it is to some degree), the world instinctively understands that it opposes the Truth. As the fills all of , one cannot help but wonder if the struggles of the world are not sin, per se, but that the Spirit has been very successful in convicting hearts.

    We are called to speak Truth, not just truth. We are to use love to convey Truth. The concept of God as gentleman fits here. God isn’t beating on them to change their ways. The Holy Spirit is alive in them quickening their hearts to the truth, but as humans often do, when confronted by a look in the mirror, they break the mirror, hide the mirror, cover the mirror, anything but look into the mirror. One of the hardest parts about framily is the Truth. We need to be in the kind of where truth can be shared in love, and accepted in humility. Sadly, far too many of our relationships—parental, child, sibling, spouse, friend—do not allow for that kind of truth.

    1) What are some reasons, you think, that sharing truth is so hard?

    2) What are some reasons—other than pride—why people don’t want to or hurt when hearing truth? What are God-related reasons? What are human-related reasons?

    3) When sharing what we think is the truth, why is it so important to use Ephesians 4:15 as a litmus test for your words?

  • Waiting to See

    Daniel 7:13-14, Luke 24:44-53, Ephesians 4:1-16

    The Book of Daniel contains many prophetic writings. Often the prophet themselves may not know what exactly the words mean. Christians, by-and-large, don’t disagree much on these verses in Daniel have to do with . It seems pretty obvious, but we can often deceive ourselves when it comes to (think the Book of Revelation). However, with our understanding (and belief) about Jesus, this passage in Daniel seems to us only applicable to Jesus. Just think about that. Daniel was given a vision of the that in no way matched his understanding of God, yet here it was.

    Even with Jesus, experiencing his , , and resurrection, the disciples had to have Jesus open their minds so that they could understand Scripture, including the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. It wasn’t easy. God had to open their minds. The disciples lived with God during his time on Earth, and their minds still had to be open. What does that tell us about ourselves?

    Jesus commands them to stay in Jerusalem until they are “empowered.” Yes, we know what that means, but did they? Jesus then blesses them and ascends to Heaven. And off they go to the ? How many people would go to someplace different, rather than stay at their “great” experience? They had someplace to go, for they had something to declare.

    The experience, the declaration, the way of life. Through the grace of Christ, it is to that we are called to live.

    1) Do you ever what people in the Bible thought about the events that they were living? Do you give them more credit (or less) than they are due?

    2) The had not yet come, yet the disciples’ minds were opened to an understanding of Scripture. What does that tell us and our understanding of Scripture?

    3) More waiting. The at the Temple may have just been the outlet for the waiting. What do you do as an outlet when waiting for God?

  • Onto Waiting

    Psalm 25, Isaiah 26:1–21, Acts 16:16–34

    Imagine being the only person at a 4-way traffic with no one else on the road. The light for you is red. And it’s still red. Most of us will wait a little bit. Some might rev their engine a little. might back up and then go forward. Both have the intent to trigger the coil system that “flips” the lights. However, what if that doesn’t work? How long will you wait?

    Most of us would start to get a bit antsy.

    Waiting for God to is commonplace in the Bible, or should we say that waiting is scriptural, but not always written about. Both in Psalm 25 and in Isaiah 26 we read about waiting. The way Scripture is written a lot of the waiting is not written about, as it happens between the points that we read.
    Sometimes, however, waiting would seem to be the opposite thing to do! and Silas are in prison. God moves, their chains fall off, and all the doors to the prison open. In such a situation (such as Acts 12), it would seem to be the wise thing to run and escape. Yet, Paul and Silas waited. From a purely , it would seem that only the could have prompted them to stay there for whatever the next was. Stay in jail? Yes, until the right moment.

    1) Have you ever had a answered, and then wondered if you should actually accept it? What was it? What decision did you make, and why?

    2) We often talk about waiting on God to act, but in Paul and Silas’ case God acted, and yet they still waited. What does this tell you about waiting for God?

    3) How do you test when to wait and when to move?

  • Not Regardless

    Psalm 116:12–17, John 6:54–69, Acts 9:31–43

    Yesterday, we briefly touched on the reality that the world doesn’t like the entirety of the message of . It struggles with nice and submission. Add on the whole life piece and the world casts it off. Other beliefs that the has wrestled with and argued over often confuse people (believers and non-believers alike), an additional excuse to ignore the message. This is not to say that having an excuse means that everything is just fine. On the contrary, it often means that the heart is hard toward the Spirit.
    When Peter asks to whom will they go, Peter could be really asking a number of things. First, he’s (they’re) all in. Second, no one else speaks/convinces like Jesus. We about the hard sayings of Jesus. It is that Jesus declares himself the True Bread of Life that his disciples (both intimate and extended) call hard. Peter doesn’t say that it isn’t hard. He isn’t saying he understands. He is saying (effectively), “I trust you, Jesus, regardless of what I understand.”
    Regardless. As inheritors of the Enlightenment, we don’t function well with “regardless.” Add onto the Enlightenment inheritance our “hard” science outlook, “regardless” is even harder. This is not to say that the Enlightenment or science is all bad. It is to say that neither is all knowing.
    “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in our philosophy.” —Hamlet (from the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare)
    Hamlet, speaking to his friend, Horatio, is referring to all the and learning that he (Horatio) has gained through his education (which was significant for the time). The world hangs its hat (so to speak) solely on the philosophies of the Enlightenment and science. The irony is that the Enlightenment and science came out of and a desire to understand, and yet many claim that religion has nothing to do with either.
    We will always struggle with reaching the world. How could Jesus be the only way to eternal life? The world does not understand.
    Peter, on the other hand, understood the best he was able. He was knee deep in theology or philosophy. He was neck deep in following Jesus the best way he knew how. Peter was, through , able to heal the paralyzed. Peter was, through faith, able to raise the dead to life. Was it his power? No, and he knew it. Did he ask, how does this work? No. He just accepts. That is one of the secrets of the Very Good Life, God despite one’s own lack of understanding.

    1) Why is Jesus being the Bread of Life a hard saying? If we don’t think it is, what are we missing?

    2) How do you work through the tension between science and religion? What do you think of the choice being science or religion?

  • Drawing Waters of Salvation

    Isaiah 12:2–6, Jeremiah 31:31–34, Luke 22:14–20

    Isaiah is often not filled with much encouragement. This particular “song”, however, is a pronouncement of the saved telling the unsaved that they can be saved.

    Isaiah starts out with his , and that his relationship with God is sound. He then tells the wayward hearer that they will joyfully (note they are miserable) draw water of their salvation. Then they will sing praises to God. Springs of salvation, or could we say Living Water? What do you think?

    Water is . This is a special truth in the desert, where water is scarce. From a scriptural standpoint, blood is the life of a creature. Thus when we come to communion, we are to consider both the aspect of blood as life (‘ blood) and water as life (Jesus is the living water). When Isaiah speaks about the spring of salvation, it is reasonable to see a foreshadowing of communion.

    With its darker tone (the blood of Jesus), it is also easy to see that this is not quite what had happened before, yet had similar attributes to the sacrificial practices of the Israelites. When Jeremiah speaks of a new covenant, there is little chance that the Israelites would have expected how that covenant would come to be. That this new covenant also changes how the “law” worked would also be beyond . How would the Israelites “know” God’s law? It is not until the Spirit is fully expressed that an understanding of this new way of the law fully revealed. There is also a special promise in Jeremiah’s New Covenant . If we all know God’s law, and have to be neither taught nor teach (admonish) . Looking at the world around us, and our own lives, the only way that happens is if we fully yield ourselves to God. Yielding ourselves to God often starts with the simple acknowledgment that we cannot fully understand God.

    The disciples didn’t fully understand God, and they spent 3 years with Jesus! Have you heard, if only Jesus were here, we’d get the real/whole story, and we’d understand (or even believe). If his disciples who were with him (even one going so far as to him) for years didn’t get it, would we be any more likely? With our post-Enlightenment and scientific tendencies, we might be even less likely to understand! Even Judas Iscariot (the betrayer) up to this point didn’t get what this specific night meant for the future. They were just celebrating Passover with Jesus.

    When we celebrate communion (a sacrament), we become participants in this last meal.

    Instead of the usual questions at the (besides, there were plenty of questions already), we will end with Book of Common Prayer, Contemporary Collect for the Fourth Sunday of :

    Gracious Father, whose blessed Son Jesus Christ came down from heaven to be the true bread which gives life to the world:
    Evermore give us this bread, that he may live in us, and we in him;
    who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
    one God, now and for ever. Amen.

    US Book of Common Prayer, 2007

  • The Proper Guest

    Psalm 104:1–15, John 6:53–58, 1 Corinthians 11:17–11:27

    From the Christian , God breathed into us. We’re not just talking about the lungs, but the spiritual life, too. God is the great sustainer. While there are those whose perspective of God is the Clockwork God (the concept that God started the whole thing and “walked away”) and for whom it is only biological life and no spirit, most people seem to be between. The two “extremes” operate within the framework that God is not active, and God does not interact with creation. Again, because one perspective has God off who knows where, and the other perspective has no God (or other “force” for that matter). There is an odd in-between version of the Spirit as a non-personal “force”, but that is even harder to comprehend.
    From an orthodox Christian perspective, without God’s spirit, we would truly be nothing more than mere biological machines. When we look at humanity, despite its often horrible state, we cannot help perceiving that there is something far more significant than just being a machine.

    What happens, though, when someone takes things and makes them anything but normal? Ask .

    When Jesus calls on people to eat his flesh and drink his blood, let’s be honest, it isn’t normal. The church has long held the view that there is definitely something going on here. On one hand, there are those that believe that when we take communion, we are literally (not just spiritually) eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus (called transubstantiation, if you want to know). There are those that believe that it is merely (and only) a memorial, we do it solely because Jesus (and ) told us to (which are good reasons), and because the church has done it for centuries ( is not a bad reason either). There are two other major perspectives. Consubstantiation is a belief that it is both body and bread, and blood and wine. The last belief is that while it is “just” bread and wine (in the Nazarene and other denominations, grape juice), it is far more than “just” that. There is an understanding that Jesus is present at the table presiding over communion, in the same spirit as the Last Supper.

    Think of that. You’re eating in the of Jesus, as a guest.

    Regardless of your perspective on communion, the church (Orthodox to Roman Catholic to Protestant) calls it a sacrament. What is a sacrament? It is something instituted by an of Jesus. Within the larger Protestant grouping, it is one of two sacraments, the other being baptism. Other traditions count additional acts as sacraments, but communion and baptism are universal.

    There is another aspect that is crucial to the sacraments…ourselves. Sacraments are instituted by God, so we don’t make them holy. However, Paul warns everyone to take them seriously. This is why an understanding of at whose table you are eating is so important. Not only are you eating and drinking with your local church family, there is the larger denomination, the church as a whole (again, across denominations), and with the church universal (both before and after us). It should never be something approached flippantly. This does not you cannot be joyful. In fact, joyful and thankful should be the exact perspective we bring to the table.

    1) For some communion should be done rarely; at most, once a month. For others, communion is weekly. For others still, it is every worship (which can be many times in a week). What is your perspective? Why? Can you see why others might have a different perspective?

    2) Do you ever think of Jesus hosting your table during communion? Does that impact how you view communion, and your participation in it?

    3) Why do you think Jesus and Paul emphasize the body and blood? What is the significance of those two words?