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: move

  • Obedience of Faith

    Nehemiah 9:26–38, John 5:19–29 (read online)

    We struggle with obedience. We struggle with rules.

    We often don’t like the rules created by others, especially if we are to live by them.

    The reality is that rules do govern our lives. Sometimes the “rules” are not truly rules but are written descriptions of reality. The laws of gravity, entropy, magnetism and so on follow this.

    Using the word “law” can be deceptive as they are a description of behavior that is perceived that all things follow. Yet, in many respects, these are the only laws that everyone obeys. These laws of physics aren’t something we think about. They are just part of our lives.

    By and large, all the legal laws we have, we don’t really think about, either, other than some of the driving ones.

    We don’t think, generally, about laws of incorporation, franchises, utilities, building codes, commerce, in fact, all sorts of things.

    Sometimes, we might have to deal with some of them, but not always. When we do we recognize it, it is as a societal hoop we jump through if we want to move forward.

    What ties all of these rules and laws together is that there is no faith component in them. There might be some sort of different faith in regards to the underlying system (e.g., capitalism, democracy), but the laws themselves require no faith.

    Unless he obeys, a man cannot believe.
    — Dietrich Bonhoeffer

    The Israelites didn’t have enough faith to obey, apparently. Or was it something else. What is Dietrich Bonhoeffer getting at? It appears to be a catch-22. The Israelites didn’t have faith, because they didn’t believe, because they didn’t obey? Does faith have anything to do with belief? Time and time again, the Israelites did not obey.

    Disobedience became a way of life, and so did unbelief. The ultimate consequence was being slaves in their own land, that they had been given by God. By the time Jesus came, while the Jews (the descendant of the Israelites) were oppressed, they weren’t (by in large) slaves. Their position within the Roman structure wasn’t freedom by our standards, granted. However, their religious leaders created new and enforced old laws that enslaved their hearts. What about obedience? And, that, is where we get to the rub of things.

    Jesus put his obedience out there in a way that was different than the religious leaders. Jesus could not do anything on his own. He bound himself to God the Father. This is the kind of obedience that Bonhoeffer is getting at. It’s not rules for rules’ sake (which is what the Jewish law had devolved to), but for the heart of God. Obedience for obedience’s sake, or to get something, is not Godly obedience. Godly obedience is doing as we are called to do by God because we were called to it by God.

    1)What do think when you think of obedience?

    2) Which is easier, obeying human laws, or God’s laws? Are you sure?

  • Broken Family; Broken Community

    Genesis 38:1–30, Deuteronomy 25:5–10, Ruth 4:1–10, Mark 12:18–27

    Migration has long been the story of humankind. People would move from place to place. The United States mythos includes a strong migratory component, from the theorized migration of First Nations peoples over the Bearing Land Bridge to the European migration to the Western Expansion, along with 2 Gold Rushes and the huge population shifts with the Great Depression and World War II. This creates a strong cultural influence on family dynamics and in the wider society. The Census Bureau estimates that from 2013-2017, 41.5% of the US population did not live in the same state (or country for foreign-born) as they were born in. How can this not impact our relationships with people, family, and place?

    Until the last 70 years, or so, when people moved from a different country to the US or even state-to-state, the family ties were broken or became perfunctory rather than profound. If you are one of those that have remained in the same state you were born in, it is still likely that your parents, or grandparents came from. Advances in transportation have allowed for some restoration of these familial ties, but this is more likely for middle- and upper-class people. With the advent of more and more connective technologies, there is greater potential to maintain these connections. It is too soon to tell if that will actually happen, though based on current evidence it doesn’t look likely.

    What does all of this have to do with our passages? They show a huge difference between ancient cultures and our own. That is part of the problem. In the first 3 passages from the Old Testament, the significance of the “kinsman redeemer” (an epithet we get from the book of Ruth) is lost in today’s culture. Put your siblings or your children into these stories as either kinsman redeemer or needing such, and gauge your responses. Most people have a negative response to it. We generally don’t get it. Many centuries later, this is still a question, as we can see with Sadducees’ question of Jesus.

    Connections. Community. Obligation. Sense of place. This should help us understand why we have such a problem with ekklēsia (ἐκκλησία). This Greek word is often translated as “church”. It originally meant a public gathering. Through the resilience of God’s Word, church as a gathered community became the dominant definition. Community.

    In many respects, the church became more of the ekklēsia during the Westward Expansion, as it was the only common gathering place. However, as transportation “improved” and the suburbs became a reality, community began to fade. Now, in the Pacific Northwest, even the ekklēsia isn’t really a community. In many churches, and some say ours, many people do not feel that they are part of the community. For some, the ekklēsia is a fancy word for an hour-long meeting on Sunday, that doesn’t really feed into the other 6 days of the week.

    1. What do you do to build community? To build community, do you think you should look to yourself, first? Or do you need to look to others?
    2. If you were to describe your ideal church community, what words would you use? If you were to describe your ideal community where you live, what words would you use? How are the words and intent both the same and different?

  • Looking and Not Turning Back

    Genesis 19:15–26, Deuteronomy 17:14–20, Proverbs 26:11, Mark 13:14–20

    Looking back to see how far you’ve come is a good practice. One of the gifts of doing so is seeing where God had been moving when you were unaware. It is also good to see what decisions you made that you will be able to make a difference for the future.

    As someone once said, looking in the rear-view mirror only shows where you’ve been, not where you are going.
    Lot’s wife looked back to her life of old (and possibly one of wealth and comfort) during the escape from Sodom. Instead of looking to where she (and her family) were going, she looked back…and died.

    As we get to Deuteronomy, looking back has taken another turn. Israel was not to “turn back” Egypt. Yet, Israel did it again and again, including their leaders. While in Deuteronomy there was still some (wrong) nostalgia for Egypt, this should have been long gone after a few generations in the Promised Land. Egypt remained such a part of the Israel story that even Jesus was taken there by his parents to escape a deadly situation. God used it as a fulfillment of prophecy. The only reason that this was so significant was that Egypt continued to be a place Israel looked back to.

    We all look back. Think of the many memes of the internet that look back to some ideal time in the past, as if there weren’t things going wrong “back then”. The world of church and American Christianity has a strong tendency toward this. A lot of effort is spent looking back at the ideal age that past (whatever age that is). This means that the church is spending a lot of energy looking in the rear-view mirror and not ahead. This is why one of the struggles of the church is following culture, rather than leading it.

    While it might seem crass to talk about vomit, the reality is that dogs return to vomit for some strange reason. While people don’t return to their vomit, per se, they still return to what they know, even if it is bad for them. This is one of the struggles that many people have as they try to change for the better. The old way is comfortable, even if it sometimes disgusting.

    Looking back—thinking of what is lost—is a huge problem for any of us. All too often that can lead to a repeat performance of what we left behind. As Jesus warns of Jerusalem’s (and the temple’s) fall, it isn’t so much wail about what was lost, but escape to what lies before.

    1) Do you ever find yourself mourning or dwelling upon what was left behind or what could have been? Why? What emotions do you feel before and after thinking about it? Does that give you any further insights?

    2) What is one thing of the past you see that your employer, social association, church, etcetera is stuck on? Why do you think that is? How can you move things forward?

    3) The fear of the unknown/uncertain often keeps us from moving forward. While we may understand that what occurred in the past wasn’t healthy, why do we go back to it? What is it about the future that we are often missing?

  • Deep Water Religion

    Matthew 21:23–27, 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12

    Religious figureheads are often accused (too often, correctly) of seeking their own gain, whether by influence or money. Even those with no Christian background see a problem with it. Truthfully, it is not just Christianity that has this struggle, not by far. As Christianity is the culturally “dominant” (though how dominant it truly has been is questionable), we generally see more of the Christian-flavored versions.

    What makes a religious figurehead true or false is a good question to have. The chief priests and elders weighed the cost of their answer. In their case, it was a matter of influence and power. They chose what they thought was the safe (or unanswerable) response. Yet, Jesus had a response for them. Their attempt to be safe did cost them, after all, though not for long.

    The ability of the American people to retain the collective antagonism toward religious figures was also played out in Paul’s letter to the Thessalonians. Apparently there were some (likely outside of the Thessalonian Christian community) that were actively trying to discredit Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy. Somehow the mess at Philippi continued to (unjustly) follow them, which was being used to discredit them. They were being accused of being into evangelism and church leadership for the money (or for free room and board). It is actually the flattering speech that has caused many churches and leaders to fall.

    When hardships come (which they do) flattering speech does not produce deeply rooted disciples. It actually can create a mob of people who feel betrayed and will go after those that “hurt” them. As Christians, it is our responsibility to move beyond the shallows of faith and move to deep waters. The deep waters are scary, yet if we well anchored in our faith, we will not go—nor be lead—astray.

    1) Who are some people (not necessarily religious ones) that speak with flattering speech? Why do they do it? If they are successful in speaking that way, why do you think that is?

    2) In this day and age, business leaders and politicians seem more likely to greedy motives. What is the attraction to their many followers, do you think?

  • Not All Good

    Lamentations 3:16–33, Job 2:11–13 James 1:9–18

    Wikipedia summarizes Nathan Robinson’s take on platitudes as:
    “A platitude is even worse than a cliché. It’s a sanctimonious cliché, a statement that is not only old and overused but often moralistic and imperious. … [they] have an aphoristic quality, they seem like timeless moral lessons. They therefore shape our view of the world, and can lull us into accepting things that are actually false and foolish.”

    By definition, a platitude is a “flat” saying that sounds significant but isn’t. However, Robinson’s take on the actual use of platitude is significant, especially as we look at Lamentations, or hear the mourning, grief, and pain of others.

    There is also another piece that Robinson may be unconsciously reacting to is that often platitudes hurt. The receiver of the platitude will often perceive the speaker as unsympathetic or unempathetic, at best, and dismissive or belittling at worst.

    The flip-side of a platitude is actually the heart of the speaker. Sometimes the platitude is to anesthetize the speaker! When they speak a platitude they don’t have to acknowledge the pain of the other or their own pain. Platitudes are often used because people just don’t know what to say, so it’s easier to say something seems helpful or profound (Especially if it sounds like it came from the Scriptures!) and just move on.

    The writer of Lamentations is miserable! Everything has fallen apart. However, in the midst of their woes, they hold on to God! The really important part to comprehend is not that the lamenter knows why, but that God loves them! The lamenter knows that God is present in the midst of it all.

    Job was in much the same state. What he needed was people to be present. These few verses of Job are the perfect symbol of what it means to be friends when one of the circle is grieving. Then these “friends” show why being present is the key…they open their mouths. While much of their speech would not seem to be platitudes, they actually were! Pointless, useless speech that was delivered as if it was profound, but it was heartfully and hurtfully false.

    James presents a more mature understanding of trials and grieving (don’t say it’s God’s fault), but he doesn’t diminish feelings. James, too, is fighting platitudes (people placing the blame on God, not themselves, for their failures). You can be mad at God. You can be sad. You can be upset. You can be confused (in our day and age, this one might be the most freeing). Perhaps in the midst of our pain our greatest temptation is to try to understand because when we seek to understand (and often feel that we do), we bury or hide the pain we feel. Burying and hiding pain might allow us to survive our pain, but it usually doesn’t allow us to thrive beyond it.

    1) Listening is often the alternative to platitudes. When has someone listened to your pain rather than give you platitudes? What about giving platitudes rather than listening? Which helped you more?

    2) An interesting struggle in our society is that those in pain look for answers prior to and often instead of grieving. Have you found yourself or others doing that? How can we help each restore a real and healing grieving process?

    3) Why is it so hard for us to merely sit with those who are in pain?

  • Very Much Active

    Numbers 11:16–17+Numbers 11:24–30, 1 Samuel 10:1–13, Mark 9:35–41

    The Holy Spirit—the third person of the Trinity—often does not act in a way we understand or can predict. That makes us frustrated. For example, there are Christians who believe the Holy Spirit has ceased miraculous activity. For some, that means no miraculous healings. For others that means no “tongues”. For others that even includes the gifts of the Spirit.

    Many tie the movement of the Holy Spirit to the 12 Apostles and Paul. However, as we read in the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit was active without them. So, where does this us? Well, there can be no question, really, that the Holy Spirit is in action. Hearts are still called to Jesus. Hearts are still changed. Lives are still transformed.
    To believe that 1/3 (the Holy Spirit) of the Trinity is inactive while the other 2/3 (God the Father, Jesus the Son) are active seems to be problematic. The Holy Spirit is God. So, if the rest of God is active, it seems illogical for the Holy Spirit to not be.

    The struggle is, again, that the Holy Spirit does not necessarily move in the ways we want or predict. Thus the conclusion is drawn that the Holy Spirit stopped moving. However, miraculous healings do occur. Tongues still occur (and not just the charismatic type). The gifts of the Spirit, including prophecy, still occur. It is often that our hearts and minds are too dull and hard to see them for what they are.

    1) Have you ever seen or experienced a miracle that could only be performed by God?

    2) If you haven’t, or haven’t a long while, why do you think (or do you think) the Holy Spirit is still active?

    3) Why do think it is important that the Holy Spirit is or isn’t active? How does your belief impact the way you live your faith?

  • Sibling Strife

    Genesis 25:19–34, Genesis 27:1–45

    If you have siblings or multiple children, you probably understand the tension that exists between siblings. Often, the tension may seem completely silly, but it is still there.

    Rabekah’s War in the Womb was definitely a precursor to the strife between the brothers. Twins (or multiples) generally do push and pull (and kick and punch) each other as they try to get comfortable. In a place that usually fits one, in now shared by more than that. The room is not infinitely expandable (ask any mother of multiples).

    The quick glimpses into their lives and their relationship with one another are quite jarring. Esau did not seem to be a future thinker. Surrendering his inheritance for a bowl of stew is not a sterling example of good thinking. Culturally, it would be viewed as having contempt for his father. Isaac was asked to move as he was too powerful, wealthy, and successful. This is the inheritance that Esau sold to sate his stomach.

    Jacob is no sterling example, either. He took advantage of his brother’s hunger. Later, he took advantage of his father’s infirmities (granted, at the direction of his mother) to claim the blessing, too. He took the last thing that Esau could have received from his father. On top of that, his mother even told him it was his responsibility, despite setting him to the task. Then he ran away (again, at the direction of his mother).

    The history of Jacob is not a great example. This is the family into which Joseph was born.

    1) What lessons as a parent and as a child can we take away from this story?

    2) What emotional and spiritual baggage do you think a person would carry away from this family?

    3) Where do you see similarities to your own family story? What baggage did you get with that similarity?

  • Were and Being Sent

    Luke 9:1–6, Luke 10:1–16, Luke 22:35–38

    This series of passages shows a progression of being sent out. The first passage is Jesus’ immediate 12 disciples being sent out. Their mission was to tell about the Kingdom of God and to heal people. Pretty simple goals. Difficult mission. This seems to be the test run, for Jesus later sends out 72.

    These 72 are told that there are few workers. The 12 didn’t get that “pep-talk”. In both cases, they (whether 12 or 72) are to only preach to those who are open. Jesus tells them to “shake the dust off” if people are not receptive. In our day and age where were seek to not offend, this can seem pretty harsh. Yet, often we are called to plant seeds and move on so that we can plant more seeds. If you plant one seed, but just stay in one place to make sure it grows, everywhere else you could have gone remain unseeded.

    Even still, there is a balance. While they are directed to move from town to town, while they are in one town, they only stay in one place. This is a not-so-subtle reminder that humans play politics. The latest prophet (or one sent by that prophet) is the latest “star”. Imagine how far too many people would clamor to host them, creating strife in a community where the Kingdom of God is being preached.

    However, the last “sending” has a much darker and starker tone. Now, they are to be fully prepared and even armed. As an aside, many commentators struggle with Jesus telling them to have swords while at the same time being the Prince of Peace and (to many) a pacifist. That’s actually what makes this third sending so dark and stark. The reality of the world is that being foolish means that you will be destroyed. Now, there is the pacifist route, the self-defense route, and the armed aggressor route. As we look back at history, there is no question that the armed aggressor “evangelism” is against the Kingdom of God. Where the balance between pacifism and self-defense is a discussion that is still going on to this day.

    Regardless, though, we know that the ways and the hows of sharing about the Kingdom of God are always changing. The message does (and must) remain the same, but how we share it changes constantly. One of the most common phrases used is, “this is the way we’ve always done it.” While, at the same time, how groceries, tools, gas, cars, and many other things are purchased has massively changed. Modes of communication have expanded. The ability to see across the world in real-time is everywhere. Yet, we want to deliver the message the same way?

    1) Where have you been guilty of saying/thinking/feeling “that’s the way we’ve always done it?” What do you think the underlying emotions are?

    2) Tossing the old just for the new can be just as bad. How can the old inform the past, and how can the new transform the past?

    3) All too often we operate as if it is old versus new. How can we operate old and new?

  • To Grieve and Mourn

    Jeremiah 9:13–21, Job 6:14–30, Matthew 5:4

    Yesterday, when we were talking about misery loving company, we were ultimately talking about people without grace and generosity in their hearts. Today’s misery is very different.

    For today, misery needs company. We as a nation and as a culture are pretty awful at mourning. We have clinicized death, separating it from our lives, except for entertainment. The reason this is important is by separating ourselves from it, we have also lost the ability to mourn. We don’t even have the “professional” mourners and wailers that Jeremiah speaks of.

    Instead, many of us are like Job, feeling betrayed when our friends avoid or abandon us during our grief. You may be saying to yourself, “my friends haven’t done that” or “I have not done that to my friends”. If so, you and/or your friends have a ministry: to the church and the world. The church and the world avoid those feelings of loss and grief. The world and the church teach it differently, but the result is the same, “suck it up, and move on.”
    There is also a darker side to this, and that is when death occurs in an estranged relationship. Many of the same responses in an estranged relationship occur in “normal” relationships, for we are very much estranged from each other. In estranged relationships, there is often an “I don’t care” response. The problem is that if there are too many estranged relationships in one’s life, there is also a lot of emotional baggage that often doesn’t get dealt with.

    Jesus, however, promises that those who mourn will be comforted.

    1) If you are a follower of Jesus, and Jesus says that those who mourn will be comforted, what do you think that means for you?

    2) When you have grieved or mourned have you pushed people away? If so, why? If people “ran away” from you, how did that make you feel?

    3) When is and what makes grieving or mourning healthy and unhealthy?

  • Three Essentials

    John 16:12–15, 1 Peter 1:1–12

    The Trinity has long been a struggle. As the church began to mature, there were many struggles, discussions, and arguments over what exactly they believed. Out of those many discussions, creeds were formed seeking to unify the church in understanding. Many have tried (and continue to try) to dismiss creeds as “The Victor’s spoils,” meaning that because the creeds were what “won”, they are invalid. The argument being that there wasn’t a consensus, and those that did not agree were tossed out of the church, argue that the creeds were then just a source of power, control, and bullying. The reality is that the creeds defining the Trinity are essential to understanding who Jesus is.

    Jesus himself makes clear that there is definite relationship between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus conveys unified ownership (What is the Father’s is mine; what is mine is the Holy Spirit’s.). There is also the often ignored, but almost essential statement, “…you can’t bear them now.” The Greek implies an inability (i.e., immaturity) to be able to understand what Jesus means.

    Peter’s triune greeting shows us that while there is not an explicit understanding of the relationship of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, there is an understanding that the relationship is essential to the church and the faith. Why is this important? Why does it matter? As we move in the world, an incomplete understanding can be an issue, and can often lead to doubt or attack. While the Trinity is beyond the scope of a devotional, knowing what you believe, and why you believe it, gives you the firm foundation to walk as a Christian.

    1) When we read Jesus’ words in the light of our relationships, there is a strong mutuality of ownership. How do you see mutuality in your relationships with others? Do you see it in your church relationship?

    2) When it comes to hard-to-understand things in life and faith, how do you approach things?

    3) Peter’s words end with service. How are you serving others in the faith, whether younger or older?