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: perspective

  • Fatalism Antivenom

    Job 5:8-27, 1 Peter 3:8–18a, Psalm 77 (read online ⧉)

    When we talk about the underlying joy of Lent (see yesterday’s devotion), we must have an understanding that this underlying joy fully rests on God, and who God is. This foundation of joy is not shaken or disturbed by the world and all its troubles, because (and only because) it is built on God.

    In our passage from Job, Eliphaz is still lecturing Job. Job 5:8 is a legal appeal. Eliphaz is telling Job that all Job has to do is make an appeal to God. If Job is as innocent as he claims, then God will spare Job. Eliphaz continues to speak, and it seems that his words are accurate, that is until we get to verse 19 (and on through 27). Eliphaz sums up his legal argument from verse 8. God will keep Job from everything bad, if Job is indeed innocent, and continues to appease God. This is essential to understand. Eliphaz had fallen victim to the culture around him regarding God. Eliphaz’s understanding was that God was transactional in nature. You give God what he wants, you’ll get good (not necessarily what you want, but still good). The conclusion that Eliphaz made was that Job didn’t fulfill his end of the transaction.

    This the perspective that many people have of God, including many Christians. This view, however, does not have the joyful foundation that is essential to a Christian life. This view is fatalistic. In other words, the world is full of bad, and there is nothing we can do about it.

    Peter has a significantly different view. Peter, having spent time with Jesus, and life being transformed by Jesus through the Holy Spirit, know we can do something about it.

    Peter gives us direction on how to be life giving to fellow believers, and even to those who do not believe. Peter knows that bad will happen. Yet, he encourages his readers (and us) to rely on Jesus Christ. This reliance is the power of the joyful life that does not laugh in the face of danger, or dance in the midst of trial, but understands that God is there beside us in and through it all.

    1) How have you been fatalistic (i.e., “there’s nothing I can do”) in your lift?

    2) How are Peter’s words an antidote to fatalism?

  • Follow the Call

    1 Samuel 2:27–3:18, 1 Samuel 16:1–13, Matthew 7:15–27 (read online ⧉)

    Often we are oblivious to God’s blessings. We succumb to the world’s perspective that things “just happen” and we “earned” it all. While in some regards there is truth in the world’s words, there is a conflict between the underlying great Truth that undergirds many of the world, and Christians. Much of the world believes that there is no God or (at best) God “set and forgot” the world and walk away. Christians, on the other hand, believe that God is active and moving in the world, especially through the work of the Holy Spirit who works through each of us.

    Eli was aware of God. Yet, he chose to disregard God’s blessings by allowing his sons and servants to ignore the Law about the sacrifices. What Eli was thinking is not written in the Scriptures. His response was either fatalistic or more along the lines of disbelief. One would think that disbelief was far from Eli’s thought process, especially with the morning’s revelations from Samuel. There is no sign or mention of repentance. Yes, Eli was upset with his sons, just not upset enough to place God before them.

    The story of Saul follows a somewhat similar line as Saul’s behavior was a lack of faith in God. That lack of faith removed the kingdom of Israel from Saul’s (and his descendants’) hands before it was even firmly established. Saul’s efforts were vapor in the wind. Still, he strived and strived. Despite having had God-directed encounters, unbelief still ended up sending him down a path that wasn’t what he wanted.

    Sometimes God calls us to great things. Sometimes God calls us to small things. From small to large, God calls us. Sometimes what we think are great things (that are beyond our abilities or gifts) are really only a collection of a lot of small (even tiny) little faithful steps of following God’s call on our lives. Sometimes it is only when we look back and see the little things stack up that we realize how large and great God’s call was on our lives.

    No matter what stage of life we are in, we are always called to follow God into new things.

    1) What do you think Eli’s s struggles were based on? Pride? Unfaithfulness? Tiredness?

    2) Have you had a refreshing of God’s call on your life? If so, what it is? If not, will you pursue it?

  • Connectional Motivation

    Mark 8:27–33, Luke 4:1–13

    Giving up others to God’s hands can be very hard. It’s interesting that Jesus explained (in basic terms) what was going to happen. It wasn’t could happen; it was would happen. Peter, emotional Peter, didn’t want to lose his friend. There also could have been a bit or, “things are going so well for you (and us). Why wreck it now?” We often look at Peter with something less than sympathy, saying, “don’t you know?” No! Peter didn’t know. He didn’t understand at all. Besides, the Messiah was supposed to be a triumphant (some form of it) figure, not a tragic figure.

    Jesus’ calling Peter out as, “…Satan…” it always interesting. Some imagine that Satan possessed Peter or whispered to Peter, and Jesus responded to Satan. Yet, the real issue isn’t so much Satan (though it is an issue), but the worldly perspective that Peter was operating under. This worldly view was present with Jesus’ temptation in the desert.

    When Jesus addressed Peter as “Satanas”, it was likely more a title or appellation, rather than the individual called Satan. We can draw this from the words that Jesus continued with afterward. Satanas means adversary or someone being in the role of adversary. One could go so far as to say that this was a temptation to worldly things presented by a friend (Peter) rather than an opponent (the Devil who tempted Jesus in the desert); harder to dismiss because of one’s feelings.

    Depending on where one is on their journey with Jesus Christ, choosing to follow God’s path can be a very hard path of suffering and cross-bearing. Depending on what one has to surrender, it could be quite difficult (parents, spouse, children). This is not to say we are to develop some of the Eastern austerity traditions of disassociation or detachment. It does mean we are called to practice releasing to God.

    As long as we live in the world, the world will call upon us to put it first, along with what it values. God calls upon us to value God first. If we are properly oriented in that direction, other concerns and cares will take their appropriate place.

    1) In what ways are you currently struggling with what the world wants and what you believe God wants? How do you discern what God wants?

    2) Where and when have you been guilty of responding like Peter, putting what you think God should want versus what the world expects?

    3) Why would detachment or disassociation from the world be bad from a Godly perspective?

  • Chained

    Romans 5:12–21, Philippians 2:5–11, Hebrews 5:1–10 (read online ⧉)

    Obedience is hard. God knows that it is hard for us. That doesn’t excuse us from it, however.

    It seems perfectly reasonable to draw from the Scriptures that part of Jesus’ unspoken mission was to show obedience and that obedience is possible. There were points in Jesus’ earthly ministry that he could have not obeyed and had a completely different result. Obedience was hard. Jesus did it anyway.

    It is amazing (and depressing) that the first disobedience led to a very long line of disobedience. Paul points out that Adam was the first man, and through Adam death came. This is, for the record, more of a story, as it does exclude Eve’s contribution. Paul was trying to tie all the prophets together, even Moses, into a big line of sin and death. This chain of sin and death was a result of disobedience. The Jewish perspective by this point was not an overwhelmingly positive one. Sin and death were very much a part of their concepts. To some degree, First Century Jews had an almost dystopian view of the world (as do many people today). Finding the positive was hard.

    Paul states that while the sin that brought sin and death to the world may be overwhelming, the grace and mercy wrought through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was greater still. So much greater was this gift that it didn’t stop merely with canceling sin and death, it brought abundant life.

    This gift of grace and mercy is given through obedience. It is not an obedience of fear. It is an obedience of gratitude for the sacrifice made that we couldn’t make and acceptance of it.

    1) As a child, what was the hardest rule of your parents to obey? Why?

    2) Why is it important to understand that sin and death are chains? Whose chains are they?

    3) What is your understanding of Jesus’ obedience? What does that mean right now for your life?

  • Child Identified

    Exodus 3:1–12, 1 John 2:28–29, 1 John 4:7 (read online ⧉)

    Moses was not a shining example of humanity. He was…human. He had a temper. He certainly had a confused identity. He was a child of the court of Egypt. How he fit (or didn’t ) into the courts of the Pharoahs is an unknown. A Pharoah’s daughter pulled him from the Nile, knowing he was a Hebrew. Then she gave him to a Hebrew to be a nurse. We don’t know anything that really occurred in his life from his assigning to a Hebrew nursemaid to the day he killed an Egyptian overseer. We can reasonably assume that Moses dealt with two identities, one as an adopted child of the Pharoahic court, and one the blood child of a Hebrew. Moses was, in many respects, destined to be forever confused and torn by his two identities. This is much the same with us. We have our human earthly identity, and we have our heavenly identity. We often become confused between them.

    John writes, “ Everyone who does what is right, has been born of him.” Most of us look at these words and ask, “What about me?” We see them in the light of our own weaknesses and failures. With that perspective, it’s hard for the words to bring us comfort. Knowing to whom John was writing (people he loved, cared for, and wanted the best for), we can be assured that it wasn’t his goal. Our identity in Jesus Christ is something far different than our identity on earth. It is to that identity that John writes. That identity has done what is right and has been born of him.

    When John speaks later about everyone born of God loves, we are again tied back to the one of whom we are born…Jesus Christ. So much of who we are is our identity. Some of our identity is nothing we can control (i.e., family of origin, birth nation, native tongue, etc.). Other things we can identify with. Hopefully, you have chosen—at this point—to identify as a Child of God through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Holding onto and affirming this identity is what creates the space in our hearts and lives to be right and (Godly) loving.

    Moses, like us, had two identities, Hebrew and of Pharaoh. In many respects, both are earthly identities prone to failures and flaws. Yet, Moses did choose to be a Hebrew. Then he accepted (granted, somewhat grudgingly) the prophetic leadership of a people taking them from earthly nation to Godly nation. Moses made mistakes before and during the journey. The Hebrews made plenty of their own mistakes. Despite all of that, however, God still identified them as his chosen people.

    1) What do you see as your earthly identities? How do they coexist, and how do they conflict?

    2) While God calls us his children, why do we tend to undermine that identity by identifying with our failures, mistakes, and tendencies?

    3) Say out loud, “I am a loved child of God.” What was your emotional and physical reaction to that? Why do you think that is?

  • Do Black Sheep Stay Black?

    Genesis 49:1–2 and 49:8–12, 2 Samuel 7:12–16, Luke 1:67–79, Revelation 5:2–14 (read online ⧉)

    You might have gathered from all the scriptures that this is about the lineage of Judah. The lineage of the same guy from yesterday’s devotion who seem to not particularly care about those of his lineage that followed him. Despite that, his father made a prophetic pronouncement that Judah had the scepter and the staff. The scepter represents the ability and position of rule. In other words, kingship was the domain of Judah. In addition, the same word also can be translated as branch or offshoot, which are also words that were applied to the Messiah. The staff probably mentioned in the translation you likely read is troublesome. The KJV is closest with ruler (and that is the way it is often translated elsewhere with Judah). In Hebrew, it also means engraved. Where does this lead us? Combining ruler and engraved is similar to a seal, so going out on a limb…authority. Kings, rulers, presidents have power. Authority is the right to use power.*

    David’s eventual rule over the Kingdom of Israel seemed to begin the fulfillment of Jacob’s prophesy. Then Nathan delivered the Lord’s message. What a message that was! What an amazing way to fulfill an old prophetic message from Jacob the patriarch of Israel. What seems odd is that there does not appear to be a direct acknowledgment of Jacob’s message. It’s there, but it is more implied than directly stated. It seems a reverse of Judah’s perspective. This also shows that despite Judah’s behavior, good can still come from bad. It all depends on what we do with it when we turn to God.

    During Zechariah’s prophecy over his son John (the Baptist), Jesus’ lineage is tied to David. This sees a deliberate tie to the message from God about David’s specific line having the authority. This same line is still the line of Judah. The Israelite concept of a Messianic figure comes long after Judah dies (though it is easily argued that there was plenty of foreshadowing). There is no way that Jacob or Judah could have imagined that God would have become man through their lineage. It would have been far beyond their imagining.

    When Jesus walked the earth, his lineage was predominantly tied to David. After his death and resurrection, however, the name of Judah regained some prominence in all that surrounded Jesus the Christ. We see this in Revelation where it all gets tied together: Judah, David, Messiah, salvation, eternity. What beautiful symmetry.

    1) Does your family or social circle have a “black sheep” (i.e., the person all avoid)? What makes that person a black sheep?

    2) Judah was a black sheep insofar as his behavior (remember yesterday, plus other things). The Messiah, your savior, came from a line of the black sheep. What does that tell you about the potential of your family’s (again, or social circle’s) black sheep?

    3) Why is understanding God’s redemption of black sheep important for our lives and others?

    Action: Look for a way to begin the restoration of a black sheep.

    *This is not a statement on whether current people in power have authority (that can be argued multiple ways with multiple bases), just to be clear. That there was a perceived need to make this statement should also cause each of us to pause and wonder what is really going on in our hearts.

  • Healing Purpose

    Mark 5:1–20, Mark 7:31–36, Luke 17:11–19 (read online ⧉)

    Jesus produced miracle after miracle. Usually, people are pretty grateful when miraculous healing has occurred. The first healing we read today is a man who is not right in the head. Whether we stick with the surface Biblical understanding of possession or go with the postmodern view of schizophrenia it doesn’t really matter. Either way, we see that Jesus performed a miracle. The man was healed and he wanted everyone to know. Jesus directed him to return home. He went to the place he was likely cast-out from and talked about and displayed his healing. He wanted to let people know what Jesus had done for him.

    The next story of healing is the deaf man, whose poor hearing had also affected his ability to speak. Jesus healed him, he could now hear and speak normally. What’s interesting here is that while only one person appeared to have been healed, there were either more people that were healed that Mark doesn’t talk about here, or the people were so excited for the man’s healing that they all couldn’t keep quiet about Jesus, and this was after he directed them to remain quiet. They couldn’t help themselves.

    The last story is probably the saddest. Jesus healed 10 men of their skin disease. 9 of them did not return to honor Jesus, nor (we can infer) did they do anything that honored God (perhaps not even seeing the priests?) in return. Only 1 man did, and he was an unclean awful Samaritan (Jewish perspective). While the gratitude of 1 out 10 is depressing, there is something else here worth looking at. Nowhere do the Scriptures tell us that the 9 men who appeared to not be thankful regained their skin diseases. Yet, only the 1 man who was thankful (or at least returned to glorify God) was told by Jesus that his faith had saved him.

    This last story shows us an important fact about the nature of God. Even when we are ungrateful, God is still loving and faithful. This also shows something else, just because we received miraculous healing, it does not mean we’re saved. That requires something else from us.

    1) What is the difference between saving faith, being saved, and being healed?

    2) What do you think God’s purpose(s) is(are) for miraculous healings?

    3) Where do you see Christians acting like the 9? Where do you see Christians acting like those healed? Where do you see Christians acting like the witnesses of the healings?

    Action: Figure out a miracle God has done in your life that you haven’t given him glory for, and share it.

  • The Sky Is Falling, Right?

    Psalm 27:1–6, Acts 9:1–22 (read online ⧉)

    The psalm may have stirred up a hymn or worship song in your mind. If wired a certain way, maybe you started singing. This psalm is from a person who is very weary. The psalmist feels as if there are neverending battles needing to be fought. The psalmist perceives that as long as God is there it’s okay. Now that doesn’t mean from a human perspective that everything will work out fine, just that as God is there it’s okay.

    The psalmist resorts to being in the house of God and seeing God in the temple. God is worth it, so thinks the psalmist. Is there hope and assurance that everything will ultimately work out? Yes. However, trusting God often means not trusting ones’ own plans.

    American Christians, with some justification, are perceiving more and more that the culture (and maybe even the world) is turning against the faith. There has always been some opposition to the faith. It’s not a new thing. Perhaps what we are seeing is a return to true balance, meaning that those that deceived themselves that they were Christians or misunderstood themselves as being Christians have begun to be free of those particular shackles. This in no way implies that Christianity is bad (just to clarify), but that many people misunderstood (and still do) what it means to be a Christian. Instead of mourning or getting defensive or getting angry about all the changes (including in our families) perhaps we ought to look to the psalmist for guidance. We are not called to win on our own, but to work on God’s plan and timetable (honestly, the hardest part). That of course, doesn’t mean we don’t have a part to play. Quite the contrary we each have a part to play.

    Paul (formerly Saul) had a part to play. He was one of those who was slandering and attacking Christians to purify the Jews of this sect. His name became feared. His arrival meant nothing good. Except that God had a plan. It certainly, from the outset, didn’t seem like a great plan. Let’s have this guy harass and even endorse the killing of Christians. Let’s have him go from synagogue-to-synagogue and even town-to-town and cleanse the faith. All seemed lost or at least losing. Until Saul had a fateful encounter with Jesus. The event was so profound that Saul chose to go by Paul, meaning that he set aside the old and became new. Remember, he was “the enemy.” Now, his writings are an essential part of the Bible.

    1) Politicians often use fear to motivate. Fear of “losing” Christianity is starting to grow. What should be the proper motivation regarding working for or expanding the Kingdom?

    2) If love is the reason for our faith, then why are we allowing fear to drive our decisions regarding our faith?

    Action: Pray the psalm, asking God for insight as to what it means for your faith and your world.

  • Same Change, Different Day

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

    The church often states that the message from God has never changed. That’s not entirely accurate. God’s amazing grace was before all and in all. God’s expression of grace was certainly in multiple forms from Adam to Jacob’s (Israel’s) sons. Through Moses, the message changed from a family group to a nation (we often miss this change). The nation and Law was not something we see as grace, yet it took a nation of slaves and transformed them into God’s chosen people. From there grace transformed them into a powerful nation. From there grace kept their identity as God’s people intact, even when they abandoned God, and ended up in other nations. The message always changed. The Truth did not.

    We Christians look at Jesus and the Gospel as the message that never changed. It is possibly more accurate to say that through Jesus and the Gospel that the message was expressed to its fullest. Yes, that is a nuance. However, that nuance is not small in any way, shape, or form. If it was small, Paul wouldn’t have gone to Jerusalem.

    Jesus’ first followers, and his core followers, were Jews. Everything was from a Jewish perspective. For them, therefore, this was a Jewish thing. It makes perfect sense that many would not be able to separate Jewish practices from their Messiah. Hence we ourselves need to be more grace-filled towards those we read about in the New Testament. Remember, they were learning just what all this meant. Paul was pretty sure what it all meant. He just had to convince others.

    This is a long preface to a new and old truth. Mode and method do not equal message. Not too long ago, we had church splits over worship music. Mostly, that’s over, though some still complain about one sort of music or the other. There is the comparisons between contemporary format (which all Generations Sunday services have) and “traditional” liturgical services. It seems so obvious to many now that these are merely different ways to still share the Gospel and gather together. Now there are digital churches. Then there are microexpression churches. This form of church caters to a specific interest group or demographic. Is it bad? In many respects, yes, for it continues the “one hour on Sunday is the most segregated hour of the week.” Granted, it is often no longer over race. It does reach people who would not otherwise be reached by “normal” church.

    The church has long needed to reinvent itself, perhaps not so much to reach new people (though that really does help), but to reinvigorate itself. The church seems to have entered a period of stagnation. Either the stagnation needs to be flushed out, or the church can suffocate. It seems harsh, yet in many respects that is exactly what Paul had to deal with. The church that was forming had to reinvent itself. It had to separate itself from the ways that kept in mired in the past. Once it broke free, the freeing message of the Gospel got wings.

    1) Why do people hold onto traditions? How do you know when a tradition is stagnate, and when it is life-giving?

    2) What “how church is done” thing do you hold onto? Why? How does it give you life?

    3) What is one “new” church thing that you enjoyed and/or found life-giving once you actually started doing it?

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

  • Speaking of Children

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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