Tag: Jesus

Under Yoke

Jeremiah 27:1–11; Jeremiah 28:1–17; Matthew 11:28–30

One of the ongoing themes of contemporary Christianity is to look at stories such as Jeremiah, and say, “of course he’s God’s prophet!” Looking back it is obvious to us. We’ve had a lot of history since then.

We know that Jeremiah was one of the 66 books of the Bible that was affirmed. We know that Jewish tradition also upholds Jeremiah. It’s obvious to us.

For the Jews, it wasn’t so clear. Sure, the “real” prophets usually were not full of good news. However, the thought of submitting to Babylon felt like a bad joke. God wouldn’t allow that, would he?

The cultural concept of American Exceptionalism and founding documents invoking God (honestly, though, more in a Deistic fashion, rather than a Christian one) and individuality, a yoke is an awful thing to contemplate.

A yoke means that one is not choosing the way. Another is choosing the way for you.

A yoke is usually pairing two or more together. So, not only is the way not of your choosing, but neither is your companion.

If a yoke is born by a single person, they are carrying a very heavy load, and often the load would not be their own.

This doesn’t fit into the thinking of many Americans raised and taught a particular “brand” of individual freedom. While contemporary American thinking and Jewish thinking have differing perspectives of the yoke (individual freedom versus Babylon), the end conclusion is the same.

The yoke must be broken!

The “prophet” Hananiah admonished Jeremiah. Hananiah, just like everyone else (even Jeremiah), didn’t want the yoke of Babylon.

What they wanted, however, wasn’t what was necessary. Why was the yoke of Babylon necessary? Pride.

Israel was quite prideful. Americans are quite prideful. Often that is what really hurts when we are confronted by yokes…our pride.

Hananiah responded to Jeremiah (and God) in pride (and blind hope). He broke the symbol of shame, and received a different yoke (death), and gave (through the example Israel followed) a heavier yoke for Israel.

Jesus promises a lighter yoke. The heaviness of Jeremiah’s yoke (and subsequently Hananiah’s) is ultimately based upon our pride. Jesus’ yoke is his pride.

This means that the yoke that Jesus offers us allows us to cast aside our concerns of our pride, for Jesus will take care of his own pride. Jesus’ pride was so humble and faithful, that it lead to his death on the cross.

Another way to think of it is that if Jesus is paired with us, Jesus bears his and our weight. That is a very light yoke indeed.

※Prayer※

Jesus, may we look for the lighter burden you seek to give us. Help us to relinquish the yoke of our pride, so that we are paired with you. Amen.

※Questions※

1) In what areas do you feel pride? What might the “yokes” be in those areas?

2) Why is it often easier to bear our burdens and not the burdens of others? How does Jesus turn that upside down?

3) Can a burden be so light that it doesn’t weigh you down? Does a burden always need to be compared to another burden?

2020-07-06
I Swear On My Oath to Vow

Judges 13:2–25; Jeremiah 35:2–14; Acts 21:15–25

People make vows every day. In the church, when a couple gets married, they say their vows. In older Christian traditions, priests/pastors are said to “take their vows” when they are ordained.

What about vows and your yes is yes and your no in no (see Matthew 5:36)? Swearing and vowing are different things. They have similarities. Part of it is our own language use.

We swear oaths (i.e., oaths of office or service). Yet, in a number of cases (military and police oaths of service for example), it might actually be better to say vows. They are making a structured and defined commitment.

A dictionary difference is that an oath is a personal affirmation of a statement; a vow is the commitment made in words. Sounds pretty similar, doesn’t it? If the dictionary standard holds true than many wedding vows are oaths. The English language is fun, isn’t it?

A Nazirite was supposed to be a person who willingly took a vow of consecration to God (Numbers 6:1–21). However, the first Biblical example is that the Nazirite lifestyle choice was made for someone who wasn’t even born! A vow was supposed to be part of the lifestyle choice, but Samson didn’t have that choice to start with.

Which, in many respects, was the situation with the Rechabites. They followed a commandment of a family ancestor, and none of them were alive at the time, either! It should be noted that the Rechabites obedience to Jonadab may not have included obedience to God. It isn’t mentioned either way, yet God uses their obedience to Jonadab as the example, not their obedience to him.

Paul made “Jewish” vows himself. Based on the head shaving, there was a least some similarity between this and the Nazirite ritual. This is not the first time that Paul has done this. It also appears that this tradition was maintained (at least at the beginning) in early Christian circles.

There is certainly something to vows and oaths. We may not entirely get it. We still do it.

※Prayer※

Jesus, you gave us guidance on our yes and no. Help us in our weakness, as we still try to cover for the failings of ourselves and others in keeping our word, and being people of our word. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Yes, no, oath, or vow? What’s the difference? When would you use each of these?

2) What are some oath’s you can think of? How about vows?

3) How does obedience fit into vows and/or oaths?

2020-07-06
Calling

Matthew 11:16–19; Matthew 12:22–28; Matthew 21:23–27

Authenticity is appreciated. Hypocrisy is condemned. That is nothing new.

What is more, the issue than even whether something is called authentic or hypocritical is when something is declared such (either way). Both Jesus’ and John’s ministries could have been declared authentic. With both men, you got what you got.

By Jesus’ own words we see how each of them approached their ministry was quite different. Jesus wasn’t making a comparison. It was an observation.

John followed a historic precedent by wearing a hair shirt and eating cakes of locust and honey. This certainly wasn’t a requirement, but a number of respected Jewish sects (the Essenes, for example) followed this sort of practice.

Other than preaching and miracles, Jesus acted more like one of the guys. He went to parties. He hung out with people.

Two very different takes.

The religious leaders had problems with both and attacked both for their practices. In the case of John, it does seem somewhat risky as the practices were followed by respected people. Jesus’ practices were pretty normal, and yet they were challenged, too.

Both men were accused, basically, of being false, and different measures were used to condemn or disregard them.

We see the real intent (as if we didn’t know) with the exorcisms that Jesus performed. The Jewish leaders accused Jesus of being in league (if not in the house of) the devil. He was doing the same thing they were, but because it was Jesus, it must be the devil.

We can reasonably infer that there was nothing John or Jesus could do while remaining faithful to their calling, that would satisfy the religious leaders. That is a sad indictment. When religious practice and traditions find nothing of value in faithfully filled callings, it puts practice, tradition, and even religion in question.

※Prayer※

Holy Spirit, help us to be faithful to your call on our lives. Help us to set aside practices and traditions that inhibit faithfully fulfilling our call. Guide us also into wisdom and truth, especially through others, so that we do not deceive ourselves. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Have you ever experienced a tension between something you were taught was “right”, but seemed to go against your calling? How did you resolve it?

2020-07-05
Time Alone

Matthew 14:1–23

Jesus’ cousin and herald was dead. He was murdered. Why was he murdered? He called the powerful to account.

Herod’s marriage to Herodias had some issues. Herod had visited Herodias while she was still married to Herod’s brother, Philip. They decided they like each other, so they decided to be married.

However, Herodias didn’t want to share the house with Herod’s current wife who wisely read the writing on the wall and fled to her father’s house. As a historical aside, this created bad feelings and ultimately led to the military defeat of Herod, eventual downfall and exile.

So, Herod wasn’t really divorced or a widower. His brother was still alive. Yet Herod married his brother’s wife. The only time in Jewish law that was appropriate was when the brother had died with no son.

John the Baptist condemned it. Herod, probably more to please Herodias than anything, put John in jail. Herodias wasn’t satisfied, and we read the rest of the story.

Jesus’ first response wasn’t to call Herod to account. Jesus made no public declaration at all. How different than our current age.

Jesus’ first response was to withdraw. Just like the rest of us at times, Jesus was not going to just move on. It is easy to infer that Jesus needed time to grieve and spend time with God the Father, even though the Scriptures do not give a full explanation.

Not that it’s bad to step away and grieve. It’s healthy, and there is a Jewish practice that goes with that (something that the church needs to approach).

Even more so for Jesus, John was his herald, his baptizer, his cousin, and probably the one person that Jesus felt a spiritual kinship due to their tied-together callings.

What happened next is sad, but we see it today. A famous person has a bad (or good) event, and people clamor around them. Famous people today have PR people deliver a statement that often asks for personal and private space to grieve. How sad that it isn’t given automatically.

Jesus may have intended such, but then see how he loved them. Jesus set aside his needs for others.

However, there are a couple of pieces that need to be addressed. First, the amount of time spent was actually minimal. It also had an end. Then once the people were satisfied, he sent the disciples away, the people away, and he had time between himself and God.

Often the focus is that Jesus set his needs aside for others. He did. Jesus also still made sure his needs were met.

In times of trial and trouble, such as caring for family that are ill, it is easy to set one’s needs aside. In the end, that breaks us unnecessarily. Not only are we hurt, but often we hurt others as our internal limits are broken.

We are not machines that can go and go. Honestly, machines can’t either. Machines need maintenance. So do we. Make sure that you are finding time for yourself and finding time for God. This is not a waste of time. It is what makes the rest of the time sustainable.

※Prayer※

Jesus, as we live in a high-performance culture, help us to keep the vital rhythm of care for ourselves and fellowship with you. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What practices do you have to “maintain” yourself? Do you have any that involve doing nothing?

2) Have you ever experience relief of anguish or pain because you were distracted by other needs? What happened to the anguish or pain?

2020-07-04
The Way of…

Romans 8:1–17; Ephesians 2:11–22

No condemnation. Those are powerful words. We just don’t live them out well. We condemn ourselves for our faults. We condemn others for theirs.

What does it mean to be set free? This is not a small question. We often immediately say, free from sin. While that is correct, it is also utterly weak, thin, and a completely insufficient understanding.

Sin is “merely” an aspect of who we are. It is a big one. It is still only an aspect.

When we read Paul’s flesh versus spirit, we stick to these 2 concepts as if they are what Paul is talking about. We take Classical (or “Greek”) thought of spirit (good) and flesh (evil), setting aside that God created the flesh. Is it corrupt? Yes. Is it evil? No.

Flesh, in and of itself, is not evil. In fact, were we to take that perspective, the rest of Paul’s writings would be pointless. When Paul speaks of flesh, he speaks of the “way of the flesh”. The “way of the flesh” and flesh (our bodies) are not inherently the same. Confusing these two continue to be an issue in the church.

The opposite of the “way of the flesh” is the “way of the Spirit”. That’s readily apparent from Paul’s words, yet still, the concept of the flesh being tied to our body rather than the sinful ways of the world creates its own issues.

There are many body image issues out there. Some of them are weight. Some of them are premature balding. There a myriad of issues. Now we have the rise of gender dysphoria. It would be easy to condemn this as the “way of the flesh”, while it is in truth a cry of the soul.

There was a time where people damaged their bodies (sometimes call flagellants) for the “mortification” of the flesh. This is not a healthy view of the body. Some have taken it (tongue-in-cheek) to the point of saying, “the body is evil; kill it with alcohol.” Even the “world of the flesh” took this view to some degree.

The true danger of this view is that it actually lessens the apparent danger of the “way of the flesh”. If it is “just” our bodies, then our new “spirit” bodies will be fine, the ones we get after we die. This still puts Paul’s words into a place he didn’t intend. What happens after is more a matter of faith and speculation. Paul is referring to the now.

The “way of the flesh” is summed up in not submitting to God’s law. The “way of the spirit” is to submit. This also was the danger of circumcision. This was a different mortification of the flesh, yet it provided the same illusion.

The reality is, as implied in Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, the way of the spirit is a journey, not a destination. The way of the spirit goes the opposite direction of the way of the flesh. One goes toward God (and submission to God). The other goes away from God (and leads to rebellion to God).

※Prayer※

Jesus, you took on the flesh of Creation and into a new stage of relationship with us. Help us honor your gift, and live lives that bring you honor and glory. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What do you think of when you hear the word “flesh”? What is the difference when you hear “the way of the flesh”?

2) Why might confusing “flesh” and “way of the flesh” an issue? How might it affect our Christian walk?

2020-07-03
Do It Good

Psalm 34; Amos 5:4–24; 1 Thessalonians 5:1–22

Turn away from evil and do what is good;
seek peace and pursue it.
—Psalm 34:14

Pursue good and not evil
so that you may live,
and the LORD,
the God of Armies,
will be with you
as you have claimed.
—Amos 5:14

See to it that no one repays evil for evil to anyone, but always pursue what is good for one another and for all.
—1 Thessalonians 5:15

Especially in the middle of the Psalm and the otherwise disturbing passage of Amos are very similar words. Paul urges the Thessalonians to do the same. Yet, pursuing or doing good can seem so vague.

On one hand, handing a panhandler money on the corner is probably not, ultimately, good for the panhandler. However, giving that same panhandler a meal in a safe and warm environment is. On the surface, both seem good. They might be also done for the right motive (love versus guilt). One is easy. One is harder (with others, can still be easy).

The Psalmist is focused more on God giving encouragement to those that love him to do the right thing. In the context of the Psalm, it is like a parent encouraging and guiding. This is what it means, the Psalmist implies, to love God and love others.

Amos’ words are those received when people do not love God and love others. Yet, as part of Amos’ admonishment to Israel is their claim that God is with them. They are right, as God is omnipresent. However, that doesn’t mean that they are with God, a nuance they missed.

Paul was a bit more explicit about doing good. When he wrote about doing good, it was to be for the benefit of others. This is self-less good. There is plenty of good, but self-less good is a step beyond. Other-than-self love is what grows the Kingdom of God.

However, doing good and seeking the good of others seems to be in short supply these days. One could say that Amos’ words apply to today, too. The rich and powerful, but not just them, are one-upping each other, and others pay the price.

Doing good for others isn’t just wearing masks in public (they certainly are annoying). It isn’t just yielding one more time to someone who thought that one more car length was worth diving into your line before they hit the cement barrier. It is one of many tiny, small, medium, and sometimes (just sometimes) it’s those really big things.

Doing good for others is supposed to be integral to walking with Jesus.

※Prayer※

Jesus, give us your strength to do good to and for others, even when they don’t recognize it. Help us to live in such a way that we do good without thinking about it, so as to give you glory. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Why do we often relegate good deeds to those that “deserve” them?

2) Think of someone you don’t like (or might even “hate”). What good deeds have they done? (Be honest with yourself)

3) When is a good deed authentic? Can you tell when you or someone else is authentic with their good deeds?

2020-07-02
Following Further

Acts 18:24–19:5; 1 Corinthians 3:5–15; 1 Corinthians 3:18–23 (read online ⧉)

Continuing from yesterday, Peter and Paul were, and remain, worthy examples to follow. In particular, it is their faithful following of Jesus Christ and their wrestling with the faith for themselves and others.

Not too long into things, however, already following fell into camps. Peter and Paul were the “original” camps and later, that of Apollos. The separation of camps was certainly not the intent of Peter, Paul, or Apollos.

The primary concern of the Corinthians was Paul and Apollos. Paul did note that Peter (Cephas) was tied into this as well. One can imagine that the 3 camps were broken into apparently ideological categories: old/Apostolic guard (Peter), Jewish guard (Apollos), Gentile/revolutionary guard (Paul).

Was this really the case for these 3 men? Neither the Scriptures nor Church histories provide any evidence of it. This was something that likely started with relationships and attraction.

We see this today, as people will follow a particular pastor. If that pastor moves on, so do they. We also often seen this camp development as a precursor to church family splits.

People will settle into camps over many issues: political party, environment, race, taxation, “freedoms”, immigration, world events, and so on. People will often find and focus on more that divides, rather than unites.

In this environment of being divided and then further subdivided, and then divided again, followers of Jesus should buck the trend and figure out how to unite. Currently, we are on the same path as the rest of the world in that regard and that does not.

We also know from the Scriptures and Church history that the early leaders did not all agree on everything at all times. Yet, their paramount allegiance was to Jesus Christ.

One could dismiss their agreement on the reality that they were oppressed or at least strongly opposed. If that’s the case, perhaps instead of greater freedom, we should pray for further difficulty (dark humor).

It wasn’t easy to stay unified. It also isn’t as if they were unified on everything. They were being unified over Jesus, which is all we can really ask of one another. That isn’t happening today.

As we always look for and at those who are one step ahead of us, we must still keep our eyes upon Jesus. The person we follow may turn away, and if we blindly follow, we too will walk away from Jesus. Keeping our eyes upon Jesus will help keep us going toward him, and not away.

※Prayer※

Jesus, while we look at others to help us in our Christian walk, help us to keep our eyes on you. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Which people are you watching or following right now? How do they lead you to Jesus?

2) Is Jesus (not “being Christian”) your lens when looking at and listening to others?

3) How do you converse generously in love, grace, and mercy with others whose understanding of following Jesus is different than yours?

2020-06-30
Following Followers

Matthew 16:13–20; Acts 11:1–18; 2 Corinthians 11:16–30

Peter appears to have been the first one to put it all together. He declared that Jesus was the Messiah.

We often look back at Peter, thinking, “Well, that was obvious!” There were actually a number of people wandering around saying they were the messiah. Jesus wasn’t the only one.

The other (false) messiah’s had followers, a lot of them. Some of the false messiah’s sought to overthrow the Roman government. They and their followers were killed (crucified) as rebels.

The religious leaders weren’t any better than the Roman government, as many of them were in league with them. Also, the religious leaders had certain expectations of the messiah (some Scripture-based, many not) that no one could fulfill (and note that Jesus didn’t fulfill all of theirs).

Peter’s declaration of the Messiah was a big deal. He assembled the “clues” together. Despite the failures and deaths of other messiahs, Peter still declared it. There would be a cost for that.

It doesn’t matter whether one takes Jesus’ statement about “the rock” as literal (i.e., the Roman Catholic church), a figurative based upon Peter’s declaration (most Protestant traditions), or the fact the Peter was the first leader of the church. Peter’s place in Church history as both leader and declarer of the Messiah is undeniable.

Peter is also the one that was first called to reaching the Gentiles (non-Jews) with the saving message of the Gospel. Thus, as most of the Church is now “Gentile”, Peter’s place should be unquestioned.

The second person that was the greatest impact on the Gentiles for the Church was Paul. Paul was almost exclusively a missionary to and a leader of the Gentiles. He, like Peter, was accused of “watering-down” the Word of God by not requiring Jewish practices for the Gentiles.

Paul, more-so than Peter, could make a “Jew-of-Jew” claim. Paul did this so that his Jewishness would not be questioned, and neither would the grace, love, and mercy of God toward the Gentiles.

It is hard to imagine how the message of God’s love through Jesus’ death on the cross would have been shared and spread without these two. Both had significant flaws. In today’s overly sensitive world (in regards to all streams of politics to morality), both men would likely be attacked.

When following Jesus, sometimes our best path is to follow the guidance of those such as these two.

※Prayer※

Father God, you have called many people to follow your Son. Holy Spirit, you have enlightened many to lead people to the Son. Jesus, you have many who are your followers. May we hear and obey the call, and being the light of the world. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What words would you use to describe Peter? How about Paul?

2) Why is it important to recognize not just their place as “doctors” of the Church, but also their humanity?

3) What do they teach you about being a follower of Jesus? What does it mean to follow a follower?

2020-06-29
A Little Prophesying

Deuteronomy 13:1–5; Deuteronomy 18:20–22; Jeremiah 28:1–9

Doomsday prophets are certainly a thing. There are a lot of them, and of varying kinds: epidemiologist (disease), environment, morality, political, sexuality, education, freedom, financial, and so on and on.

Doom sells. Doomsayers may also be helpful to guide us toward some sort of preparation or change. At this point, however, there are so many doomsayers that there are only two logical conclusions: we’re doomed or they’re wrong. That is really the two paths regardless of which or all the “dooms”.

What is interesting about “prophesying” in the Scriptures is that not all prophesying is alike. Some prophesying is more akin to teaching, lecturing, discipling. That generally would fall under church categories as preaching, pastoring, and life groups.

Other prophesying is more like visions, dreams, and euphoric states. This is what we, as a tradition (versus language), understand as foretelling or forewarning that is spiritually driven, and is our default interpretation when reading the word in the Scriptures.

The struggle is discerning whether the prophecy or “prophetic word” is from God, from other spiritual forces, or is it of self appearing to be “spiritual”. Especially (but not exclusively) with the internet, there are plenty of videos, blog posts, web sites all claiming some sort of divine connection.

Sadly, there is no way to tag “fake prophesy”. That takes wisdom, discernment, and positive Christian relationships.

※Prayer※

Holy Spirit, strengthen your discerning gift in us. Father God, help us to look through your word so that we can see when someone is using your word falsely. Jesus, help us to keep in mind that you told us that there would be many false prophets before your return. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Have you had someone deliver a prophecy or “prophetic word” to/about you? How about as part of a public declaration (with or without you being the focus)?

2) What are you actively doing to protect yourself from false prophesy or “prophetic word”?

2020-06-28
Money Change

Luke 7:36–8:3; Luke 24:1–12 (read online ⧉)

In Jesus’ day, women held a “lesser” societal role. It’s not that they held no role. In Roman culture, women’s roles were actually in somewhat of a cultural disarray as “free” marriage was opposed by Augustus Caesar who wanted a “traditional” male-dominant marriage. Marriage differed between “noble” and “common” people, too.

In Jewish culture, women did have a lesser role, but today rabbinical tradition holds to matrilineal which is estimated to have begun in Jesus’ lifetime! In other words, “the fathers” that were held in apparent esteem, would no longer be the “line”.

This means that in the time of Jesus’ ministry, there was likely a lot of turmoil regarding women’s roles in both Roman and Jewish societies. Having named (versus anonymous) women listed as Jesus’ followers could either have been a cultural shock or no great surprise.

Currently, the general consensus has been that the women’s presence with Jesus would have been a shocking thing. Yet, even the words of the Sadducees and Pharisees don’t mention the women as followers. In the first of today’s verses, the scandalous (“sinner”) woman was pointed to. Jesus was questioned for pardoning her sins. Her presence didn’t seem overly surprising.

As Jesus continues his story of the debtor, the gender is irrelevant to God’s grace and mercy. We go from hair being used to wipe feet, a parable of the debtors (money), then the jump to the financing of the mission of Jesus. We learn that women appeared to be the financial backers (or at least the mentioned ones) of the mission. Judas Iscariot may have “held” the purse strings (John 12:6), but he obviously was not the fundraiser.

These women had all had (apparently) miraculous healing encounters with Jesus, so they supported Jesus’ ministry. Joanna is culturally the most interesting, as her husband was Herod’s household manager. In some respects, her presence may have caused some to be more hesitant when it came to dealing with Jesus, for who knew what Joanna could have had happen. Perhaps not in reality, but people will invent large stories in their fear, to justify their inaction.

According to Luke, Mary Magdalene and Joanna were two of the women (Mary at the grave of Jesus on the Day of Resurrection. That these two women showed up, which means that they viewed Jesus as family, for they were taking on the role of family caring for the dead.

The transformation of these 2 women, in particular, is a good lesson. Jesus saved them. They responded in gratitude (giving) and following (discipleship). Then they became family (possibly sanctification). What their role was after that is, sadly, unclear. It may not matter in the end. That they allowed Jesus to continue to upend their life is what matters.

※Prayer※

God of our transformation, help us to have hearts of peace as you upend our lives. May our lives be continually transformed so that they can display your light. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Other than COVID-19 itself and the general upending of all our lives, what is the biggest thing being challenged and changed in your life?

2) How have you experienced the Holy Spirit initiate, transform, and sustain life change?

2020-06-25