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

Devotion.al

Tag: Jesus

  • Peace and Blessings

    Numbers 6:22–27, Luke 10:3–12, John 14:25–30, John 20:19–28 (read online ⧉)

    The Levitical or priestly blessing has been a mainstay for the Jews and Christians for millennia. The pronouncement of blessing, protection, acknowledgment, grace, favor, and peace pretty much sums up what a life with God should result in. What makes this tiny passage even more strange, yet intimate and comforting is that God states that this is God’s name. Perhaps not a name in the proper sense, but God’s name nonetheless. God’s name would then be Blessing Protecting Shining (i.e., “I see and acknowledge you”) Gracious Favoring Peace-Giving God.

    When Jesus, therefore, sends out the disciples, they are being sent out on his (God’s) behalf to bestow peace upon others. So, think about this…they are to withdraw their peace from houses that do not respond. If peace is there…if God is there. If peace is not there…God is not there. There there is how peace is lived out. The disciples were to go to the first house that welcomed and accepted them. They were to go from house to house to get a better deal (certainly not the way our culture functions). Were they to do this, they would be contaminating God’s peace that they were sent with.

    This becomes even more apparent in Jesus’ bestowing of peace on his 11 disciples on his final night with them (Judas had left at this point of the evening). They were no longer just sent with his peace (as they were before), but now they were bearers of his peace. It sounds similar, granted, but it is different. Similar to baby birds, they went out (previously) and came back. However, now it was time to leave the nest, and they had to carry forth on their own.

    Yet, even on their own, Jesus still has to restore their peace, just as it is with us. They had just witnessed something horrible, evil, and unjust. Then they experience the unimaginable. Now they were, they felt, like sheep without their shepherd. This time, peace is the tranquility in the storm. Only Jesus can give it so deeply. Only when we embrace it do we receive it.

    1) What does it mean to embrace the peace of God? What might it mean to us and the way we live our lives to embrace the peace of God?

    2) Surrender is a significant part of God’s peace. What needs to be surrendered for God’s peace?

    3) What has to be surrendered for the world’s peace? What is the difference in surrendering to God and to the world for peace?

  • Valuing the Heart

    Psalm 6, Mark 5:24–34, Luke 7:36–50 (read online ⧉)

    We greatly honor our doctors and nurses who nurse ourselves and our loved ones to health. However, what we do today is different than it used to be. Science and medicine have provided us information that is beyond ancient knowledge. Even we untrained people have a far greater knowledge of healing than was available to the normal person many years ago. Thus when the scriptures ask for healing, and when healing occurs it is a miracle. This is not to diminish the healing received then or now. However, there is something here in Scripture that is only recently coming into mainstream thinking…peace.

    The woman who touched Jesus’ cloak was both desperate and had faith. An interesting combination to say the least. Suffering from an injury/illness for 12 years and bankrupt because of it. We’ve heard stories of or known people who may have not suffered as long but certainly lost everything. Healing was great. Peace was needed too with all that she had gone through.

    Then there was the woman who poured perfume on and washed Jesus’ feet. Obviously infamous among the “clean” and “appropriate” people, she was probably a societal outcast in some form or another. Her entire life was not likely to be a gentle one. She needed peace.

    Neither woman, at the point we meet them, are doing well in life. Based on context, we can reasonably say that they were the downtrodden of the downtrodden, and they were women. All of this piled together in that time meant that even being healed or being defended by Jesus would not necessarily make their lives easier.

    What Jesus did is justify their existence. He saw them for what they were…children of God. He valued them. By valuing them, and publically doing so no less, he gave them an opportunity to have something they may have never had, or hadn’t had in a very long time…peace.

    Our medicine and science are great. We are doing so well on the “mechanical” side of healing. We aren’t, however, doing as well in healing hearts. In cases of severe health issues, just being healed is only the beginning. There are some forms of emotional trauma that go along with that. Those that have suffered need peace.

    1) The “mechanical” nature of medicine resembles other “mechanical” areas of our society. Why do we avoid dealing with emotions? What does it mean to you that Jesus brings peace in those situations?

    2) Societal healing is painful. Currently, there are a lot of scabs being peeled off and oozing sores finally being treated. Thinking of the above stories, what does that tell us about how Jesus would respond today?

    3) Christians regularly pray for physical healing. Why? What do we miss when we pray for physical healing alone?

  • Herald of the King

    Isaiah 40:3–11, Malachi 3:1–2, Luke 1:39–44, Luke 1:59–80 (read online ⧉)

    It has been said (by Christians, of course) that John the Baptist was the last Old Testament prophet. By that, they meant that Jesus (and his life, death, resurrection, and the subsequent baptism of the Holy Spirit) was the New Testament. In some ways, they are correct. The New Testament is about the life and work of Jesus Christ, and the new work of the Holy Spirit (through the church). John the Baptist was the last one (though not really) to say that God was coming before God actually came. John the Baptist sounded like many of the prophets of old.

    It seems peculiar to call John the Baptist, well, the Baptist. According to the Scriptures, perhaps he should be John the Herald. It would certainly be appropriate. It would also call to mind John’s purpose, heralding the coming of God, rather than focusing on his acts of baptism. It’s not that the baptisms he performed were bad, but ultimately they were a witness to the coming of Jesus.

    That John, in the womb (!), “leaped” at the voice of Mary is startling (though babies do recognize voices in the womb). Even in the womb, John was heralding the coming king. It is sad, in some ways, that John’s place seems to have been decided from a young age, yet he could have made a different decision.

    Ultimately, John’s purpose was fulfilled by heralding Jesus’ arrival. Like so many do, he could have opposed Jesus, and many would have listened. He didn’t. By his actions, he fulfilled the words of his father. John guided the people to the only one whose way is the path of peace.

    1) John’s place was definitely one of number 2. Have you ever been a number 2 or lower? How did you feel? Did you just spiritualize your answer?

    2) Why do you think “the Baptist” became John’s title rather than “the Herald” or something else?

    3) What do you think about John going to the wilderness when he grew up? Why do you think he did that? Do you think he was alone?

  • Receiving Peace

    Luke 12:49–53, Luke 14:31–35, Luke 19:32–38 (read online ⧉)

    Jesus has the title of Prince of Peace, yet our first passage today from Luke certainly causes one to question that. Some scholars align this with the Jewish zealot party, which sought the overthrow of the Roman Empire in Israel by (primarily) violent methods. However, it is prefaced by fire. Again, it sounds strange, unless we recognize that this is a cleansing and purifying fire. The sad truth is that many will be confronted with Jesus’ words and make a decision that has the potential to destroy relationships. This is the division that Jesus brings. Some will follow Jesus, the rest will follow the world.

    The title of Prince of Peace should probably be written more properly, the Prince (of the people who live by and call on and believe in the name of the Lord) of Peace (knowing that the Creator of the Universe is overall). It’s a lot wordier, but it helps us understand the seeming conflict between Jesus’ title and the first words we read.

    Certainly, war would not be the function of the Prince of Peace, would it? Yet, here Jesus uses that analogy. It’s not because Jesus desires war, but because the people were surrounded by war and its legends, meaning that this was an effective way to speak to people. On the other hand, we could look at it as the weaker party (us) seeking peace with the stronger party (God), and, oddly enough, the negotiation and sealing of that agreement is through Jesus Christ.

    The reality is that the ultimate culmination of peace will not happen here. Peace is in Heaven. However, when we spend time meditating on God’s word about peace, and meditating on who Jesus is (the Prince of Peace), we receive God’s peace here on earth.

    1) What are your thoughts about flame being a purifying image? What concept, if any, in Christianity is symbolized by a flame? How do they work together?

    2) Does it bother you that Jesus uses war imagery to make a point? Why or why not?

    3) If the ultimate peace only happens in Heaven, why pursue it here on earth?

  • Peace is in Heaven

    Luke 12:49–53, Luke 14:31–35, Luke 19:32–38

    ‌Jesus has the title of Prince of Peace, yet our first passage today from Luke certainly causes one to question that. Some scholars align this with the Jewish zealot party, which sought the overthrow of the Roman Empire in Israel by (primarily) violent methods. However, it is prefaced by fire. Again, it sounds strange, unless we recognize that this is a cleansing and purifying fire. The sad truth is that many will be confronted with Jesus’ words and make a decision that has the potential to destroy relationships. This is the division that Jesus brings. Some will follow Jesus, the rest will follow the world.

    ‌The title of Prince of Peace should probably be written more properly, the Prince (of the people who live by and call on and believe in the name of the Lord) of Peace (knowing that the Creator of the Universe is over all). It’s a lot wordier, but it helps us understand the seeming conflict between Jesus’ title and these first words we read.

    ‌Certainly war would not be the function of the Prince of Peace, would it? Yet, here Jesus uses that analogy. It’s not because Jesus desires war, but because the people were surrounded by war and its legends, meaning that this was an effective way to speak to people. On the other hand, we could look at it as the weaker party (us) seeking peace with the stronger party (God), and, oddly enough, the negotiation and sealing of that agreement is through Jesus Christ.

    ‌The reality is that the ultimate culmination of peace will not happen here. Peace is in Heaven. However, when we spend time meditating on God’s word about peace, and meditating on who Jesus is (the Prince of Peace), we receive God’s peace here on earth.

    1) What are your thoughts about flame being a purifying image? What concept, if any, in Christianity is symbolized by a flame? How do they work together?

    2) Does it bother you that Jesus uses war imagery to make a point? Why or why not?

    3) If the ultimate peace only happens in Heaven, why pursue it here on earth?

  • Different Not Defeated

    Obadiah 11–17, Joel 2:12–19, Luke 21:12–19 (read online ⧉)

    The problem with being a follower of Jesus is, well, being a follower of Jesus. First, it makes you different. There’s step one. Being different. We all want to fit in, but as a follower of Jesus Christ, we aren’t supposed to just “fit in” to the world. Sometimes that may mean we don’t fit into the church or even our family. We don’t like that. It is uncomfortable.

    The next problem, or at least something that should be a problem, is that we aren’t liked for being followers of Christ. This doesn’t mean that we are to be unpleasant or cruel. We are to display holiness, which we ourselves struggle with and against. There will be trials and tribulations, or there should be. That has been one of the biggest pitfalls of being in the United States. We have lost most of the tension that our faith has with the world. We have become comfortable with the world, especially as expressed in the United States. This is why we should embrace our growing discomfort in the current culture. We are beginning to rediscover the cost of being a Christian. We certainly are not at the place where Christians are being targeted programmatically. While many of our beliefs are being challenged in the culture and government, we are still free to practice our faith without fear.

    What gets interesting is how much of the non- and anti-religious people are beginning to gloat with their apparent victories against the faith. History doesn’t support their victory laps. The faith was practiced behind closed doors for years and flourished. We are seeing it now in other countries. The greater the oppression, it seems, the greater the growth. Obadiah’s warning to the gloaters is that they ought to be careful in their gloating. They confused discipline and training for destruction and defeat. Sadly, so do many Christians.

    We are called to be in a healthy state of continuing repentance. It’s not as if God doesn’t already know that we messed something up. God is God. A state of ongoing repentance means that we do not think too much of ourselves and too little of others. This is how we keep ourselves from surrendering to defeat and allowing ourselves to embrace God’s discipline.

    The part that often confuses Christians and non-Christians alike is that if Jesus Christ is King, then why does all this bad stuff happen to anyone, let alone Christians? That is a great question, and if asked honestly, it is worth working through. That doesn’t mean we will have all the answers, nor does it mean we will have the right answers for everyone. We need to have the right answer to that question for ourselves. When we are confident in the power and strength and wisdom of the King of Kings the power of our answers is not the facts they convey but the Truth that is God.

    1) What do you think of the current culture compared to so-called church culture?

    2) Where do you see yourself not fitting into wider culture? Where do you see yourself not fitting into church culture? How does following Jesus affect either?

    3) What is your emotional response to apparent cultural victories over Christianity and even faith in general? What does that response tell you about yourself?

  • 25 November 2019

    Zechariah 12:1–8, Revelation 18:1–10, Matthew 20:20–23, Luke 22:14–20 (read online ⧉)

    A cup is a common thing. You probably have a few in your cupboards. You might even have so many you have to get rid of one to fit another. You might have ones for special times (like china for Thanksgiving). You might have Christmas themed ones. You probably have ones that were given to you as a reminder or an advertisement. There is nothing special really special about cups. However, as we read the Scriptures, cups star in a number of places.
    Joseph used his cup (his very special one that only he had) to entrap his brothers. Pharoah and Nebuchadnezzar had their cupbearers. These cupbearers had authority within the courts of the leader. Cups, it seems, were not always so common.

    The prophet Zechariah has a vision of Judah being a cup. Nations would drink of this cup. The consumption part represents well the takeovers, wars, slavery, and exile. The nations around Judah (even their Semitic cousins in Samaria) really did a number on Judah. It’s not that Judah did the right things and was still on the losing end. Judah had continually made the wrong decisions. God wasn’t just going to restore his people once they yielded their hearts. God would use Judah as the source of retribution for all the nations that had (by their actions) treated Judah wrongly.

    This imagery is echoed in Revelation. This time, instead of the small underdog nation being the source of retribution, it would now be the leading city (symbolized as Babylon) that would be the source of its own destruction and the nations that followed it. This symbolic Babylon was completely lost in the depths of unGodly practices. The nations that idolized it or followed its practices would end up with the consequences of their choices.

    In Matthew, Jesus uses similar imagery to hint to James and John that the contents of Jesus’ cup will do the same to them as it will do to him. Of course, they did not yet understand what that meant. Is some ways, while Jesus did not “give” them the seats at his right or left hand, he still symbolically handed his identity to them when he said they would drink from his cup. They probably felt better about not getting their “seats”, at least until they realized the cup’s contents.

    This really comes to a culmination in the Cup of Salvation. The “blood” of the New Covenant shared by Jesus with his disciples and eventually with us. The cup is Christ’s. When we share the cup, we share in the name and identity of Jesus. We also identify ourselves with and by the New Covenant. We also identify ourselves by his death and the freedom we bought. Lastly, though, each of us may have something that needs to be sacrificed to live a life with and for Christ. We have chosen to drink from the cup and by so doing stated that we will accept what it brings.

    1)Do you have a favorite cup? Why is it your favorite? Without knowing the story of if, what could people learn about you from it?

    2) God’s grace and love are often found in “ordinary” things. In what other “ordinary” things do you find God’s grace and love?

    3) Why is it important to look for and see God’s grace and love in ordinary things?

  • Kingly Control

    1 Samuel 8:4–9, Psalm 24, Jeremiah 23:1–6, Matthew 21:1–9, 1 Timothy 6:12–16 (read online ⧉)

    One of Jesus’ titles is King of Kings. In our day and age kings are more of a symbolic position, so it has become difficult for us to understand the significance of this title. We can only intellectually understand the power that many kings had over their people. If you were to read beyond the outlined passage in 1 Samuel, he (Samuel) outlines the power the kings have over the people. If we go back to Joseph in the story of Genesis, by the time Joseph was done, the Pharaoh had everything, including the people.

    What is interesting is that there seems to be a strong human desire to put itself under a strong person…even a commanding one. If that were not the case, we would not continually see dictators and totalitarian regimes. We can regularly look at history and see people turning towards it. Even with the last two presidents of the US, we all heard language that puts them in a salvific role, one that isn’t theirs.

    Much of this desire is a feeling (right or wrong) of security, or at least that this would be more secure than the current circumstances. People turn to others that appear to have the power to control (not necessarily change) things, in hopes that these people can control bad circumstances.

    The struggle that many people had with Jesus was that he didn’t take control. His triumphant entry or the time the people wanted to crown him, he never took up the scepter of power. Instead, he took a path of peace. When he entered Jerusalem on a donkey, he entered as a king of peace. Had he come riding a warhorse, he would have been coming in power to take power. Many people wanted this. Their own tyrant was better, so they thought, than a tyrant of Rome. It’s not to say that Jesus would have been a tyrant, but that the people would have preferred one of their blood on a bloody throne, then keep the Romans.

    Today, one of the common arguments against believing that there is a God, especially a loving one, is that this God hasn’t taken control, just like God hadn’t taken control in Samuel’s day.

    1) Have you ever witnessed someone submitting to another person who was in power? Why? Did you support or did you question?

    2) How does Jesus use power differently than “earthly” powers? How does this inform you of how to use power? How does this inform you how you should discern how others use power?

    3) What does Jesus being King of kings mean to you? What does being a king mean to you?

  • 23 November 2019

    Jeremiah 22:18-30, 2 John 4–11 (read online ⧉)

    It is always a parent’s hope that something of them will be passed on and carried by their children, and even their grandchildren. If it is a company or wealth, people generally make detailed preparations to make sure that all goes as planned. There are wills, contracts, foundations, trusts and so on that exist to do this. Are they always successful? No. The same is, sadly, also the truth about faith. Sometimes the parents don’t have the tools or support. Sometimes the children don’t connect. Sometimes circumstances occur that drive the child (or the parents) away from the faith. Then the next generation falls, too.

    King Jehoiakim was the son of Josiah. Josiah was a faithful (to God) king. Johoiakim’s brother, Jehoahaz, was king 3 months before being deposed by Egypt. Jehoiakim’s original name was Eliakim, meaning “God will establish.” The Pharaoh of Egypt renamed him to Jehoiakim, which means “Yahweh will establish.” Why does this matter? Josiah named his son in faith that he would carry on. He didn’t. Neither of these brothers did. Did Josiah mess up? Possibly. Were there lots of people pressuring the men to stray from God’s path? Most definitely. The Pharaoh probably renamed Eliakim/Jehoiakim as a matter of dishonor, dismissal, or a statement that their God established him (Pharaoh) as their ruler.

    Do we hold Josiah accountable for his sons? Biblical commentators nor pastors preaching on passing on the faith seem to. Yet, when a child or grandchild turns from the faith, we often feel and act as if the parent is solely responsible for that choice, or mostly responsible for the choice. There are plenty of individuals in the Scriptures that are held up today as examples whose children walked away from the faith. Rarely do people recognize the disconnect.

    John’s letter to the “lady” is oddly phrased. Some commentators believe that John was referring to a house church as the lady, but with the variables of singular and plural words, it is more likely that there are singular “you”’s and plural “you”’s that are intentional. Regardless, John celebrating that some (note, not all) of her children are following the faith reinforces that this is nothing new. Perhaps we are putting too much pressure on people to be “perfect” in passing on the faith. Should we all try hard? Yes! Should we still try when it seems impossible? Yes!

    Ultimately, though, we have to recognize our responsibility to do our best as we are able. We are not God. God calls them. They must choose to respond.

    1) Is there anyone you feel called to bring into fellowship with Jesus?

    2) Why do you think they don’t know Jesus, or may not want to know Jesus?

    3) What the part in their relationship to Jesus are you responsible for?

  • 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 Jesus refers here to the Kingdom of God. Jesus often refers to the Kingdom having already come, but here it is in the future. 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 foolish. 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 Scriptures. He’s usually a little more obvious, and the Gospel 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 ready, 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 groom. 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 bride 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 church 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?