Tag: remember

Rumble

Exodus 19:17–20; Haggai 2:5–9; Hebrews 12:25–27

We are often skeptical about God making the mountains tremble and the oceans roar. Our deeper understanding of the natural world makes us a little arrogant about things. We “know” that it’s really tectonic plate movement that causes that. The heavens don’t really shake, so we think. We “know” all about stars and gas giants and planets.

While the Scriptures often turn to (what was to them) mysterious events beyond their understanding, their underlying understanding matches our own. God created everything.

The writer of Hebrews understood and shared that created things are not permanent. They will not last. The writer of Hebrews presents this in contrast to the Kingdom of God which is eternal.

Often, we judge our lives, their successes, and failures, upon the frailties of created things. Sometimes we value our lives based upon career, money, gathered things. Sometimes we value our lives upon people. Regardless, in the face of the Kingdom of Heaven, they are only temporary.

In a time such as this, when society seems so unstable, it is good to understand that the Kingdom of God is stable, everlasting, and unshakable.

※Questions※

1) What is something created or temporary you find really important? Why?

2) Even when science gives a mechanism or way to understand the natural world, why is it still critically important to remember who created it all?

3) What’s “shaking” you right now? How can you put that on the sure foundation of the Kingdom of God?

※Prayer※

Lord, help us be assured that we are firmed rooted on your foundation. Amen.

2020 10 25
Get To Your Seats

Luke 14:7–14

When I was young, my father insisted on making sure I was appropriately experienced in “high” culture. We went to ballet and opera. My dad said that we were sitting in the Grand Tier (still sounds a bit grandiose). This was the tier above the Opera (i.e.,floor) Seats, and below the Upper Tier, and certainly not the box seats. This would be so we had the best seats to see everything.

He was right. We were just high enough that barring a really tall conductor (I remember one), our view of the stage allowed to see everything from the top of the sets to the artists’ feed (really important for ballet, not so much for opera). Oddly, the Opera seats were more expensive, and the crane-your-neck-uncomfortably-for-hours box seats were even more so.

Which seats were the right seats? That depends on why you were there. For those in the box seats, sure there were those for the arts. There were those that were there to be seen. There were those who were there because it was expected of them.

Depending on the individual and event, what seat a person might choose to sit in changes. For some people, going to a party is a high-stress environment, and they’ll gravitate toward a “safe” person (if there is one) or a dark corner or wall to “hide”.

There’s also that person who will jump to the center of the room because they are the life of the party, or they will be.

When Jesus talks about the seating at the banquet, it about a lot of things. What we often don’t talk about in this parable is the parallel to Gentile life. This may have been less about the “honor” seating, but more about how the “pure” “religious” “sanctified” Jews were emulating the behavior of those they despised and feared.

This a jump for sure from the text to the context. However, when we see the behavior of the powerful or popular there is a strong tendency to emulate it. Romans were in charge. This is how the Romans behaved; therefore, it seems reasonable that the oppressed would copy it, not because they wanted to, but because it’s a natural response to avoid gaining the wrong attention of those in power.

If this is indeed the case (again, which is reasonable), then we have a possible case of syncretism, a combining of two different (often competing) worldviews and/or religions.

When a person was given the seat of honor due to their religious position in a non-religious setting or honor due to their secular position in a religious setting there is a mixing of two different worldviews that should be in tension with one another, and not in harmony.

※Questions※

1) Where do you see your political worldview and your religious worldview in harmony? Where do you see them in conflict?

2) Are you comfortable where your politics influence your religion? Does your religion affect your politics?

3) Do you evaluate people’s religious affections based upon their politics? Do you assume a person’s politics based upon their religion?

※Prayer※

Jesus, help us surrender our will to you, that you are the Lord of our religion and our politics. Amen.

2020 10 13
Are You There Yet?

Romans 7:15-20; Philippians 3:12–21; 1 John 1:6–2:6

If you’ve ever been on a long trip, whether as a parent or a child, “Are we there yet,” is a common question. So common that some people can time when the next time the question will be asked. The “are we there yet” question is an event- and time-based question with an answer.

“Are we there yet,” when asked as a spiritual question is something completely different. In a performance-based culture, such as ours, there are often attempts to assess and evaluation the successfulness of our holiness.

If we are not careful, this can become overwhelming, and even deadly to our spiritual growth. If we are so concerned about how we are evaluated and what the measure is, we are often tempted to meet the “requirement” of action without the heart-change that we seek.

When we perform “holiness” through tasks and checkboxes we become as overburdened as the Jews had been for so long with their Law. Thus our “holiness” becomes an act of will. So, when we are tired, discouraged, down, or something else, our holiness house of cards comes tumbling down.

Paul wasn’t there yet. In Romans, he expresses his grief/frustration/reality that he keeps missing the mark of things. He recognizes a conflict between our human nature bent towards its own gratification, and our God-nature desiring to be in God’s grace, mercy, and love.

He also writes to the Philippians much the same way. He knows he is “there” yet. That doesn’t stop him from reaching toward the “goal” with all his might. In many respects, Paul’s “forgetting” is key to moving forward. We are all inclined to remember our failures (especially when they are painful). It is especially important to have someone to confess to and be held accountable by. Oddly, that seems to help us move on.

Then there is the “confession” that has been used for generations in some traditions regarding confession and redemption. The sin is an issue. The unconfessed, unrepented, and unreconciled (can be read as unforgiven, but not entirely accurate) sin is the bigger issue. When John talks about not being in fellowship, it is the unconfessed, unrepented, and unreconciled sin that “shows” we are walking in darkness.

Paul and John (and others) know full well that we have an advocate who is looking to judge us but to forgive us.

※Prayer of Confession from the Book of Common Prayer (2019)※

Almighty and most merciful Father,
     we have erred and strayed from your ways like lost sheep.
We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts.
We have offended against your holy laws
We have left undone those things which we ought to have done,
     and we have done those things which we ought not to have done;
and apart from your grace, there is no health in us.

O Lord, have mercy upon us.
Spare all those who confess their faults.
Restore all those who are penitent,
     according to your promises declared to all people in Christ Jesus our Lord.
And grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake,
     that we may now live a godly, righteous, and sober life,
     to the glory of your holy Name. Amen.

2020 10 12
What a Feast!

Matthew 22:1–14; John 6:53–58

When you’ve been invited to a party or some sort of celebration, have you ever received a little card that had you select from entree and/or other options? Or have you been to a buffet and been overwhelmed by the selection (or underwhelmed)?

Over the years there have been many tales of what the feasts in Heaven would look like. Some have used it to recruit people to their church or religion. For many, a gathering of family barbecues every day would be fantastic. So, of course, that’s would be what Heaven would be like (all the social introverts just shuddered)!

Making assumptions about things like that is often unwise, as it can lead to weird thoughts and even bad theology. The more serious part of that is that the primacy of feasts in the Scriptures is not to be diminished. This is especially true when we remember the feast that Jesus left to fill the gap while we wait for his return.

The feast that we have, though, is peculiar. Those who have been long in the church have been inured to the strangeness that is the Eucharist. As we read in John…eating human flesh and drinking human blood? If someone came to you and said that…how would you respond?

We read this and we immediately translate it into Christian language and thinking. If someone like Jeffrey Dahmer (real-life cannibal) or Hannibal Lecter (fictional cannibal) said something like this, we would not have such a Christianized response. That is the horror and revulsion that his hearers and likely even his disciples felt when they heard these words.

The Christian side of it is that we see the “spiritual” side of this as perfectly reasonable. We do have to keep in mind that for years Christians were accused of cannibalism because of the words of Jesus, and the regular Love Feast.

The Christian side of it also continues in two ways. First, by associated with blood, Jesus was associating with the Jewish belief of life was in the blood (from Levitical law). Second, by associating with the bread, Jesus was tying himself to the daily necessity (and often only food) of bread.

Lastly, though not often talked about, is the Jewish concept of eating the word of God. This was the Jewish practice of licking (literally) off a slate upon which Scripture was written (the Shema would make the most sense) with honey poured on it. There is some historical question if this was a 1st Century thing or if it developed later. However, there is some precedence from Ezekiel 3:3 who ate the word of God on a scroll.

Also, we understand that Jesus was the incarnate word of God (John 1:1–4). Thus, eating the word of God takes on a completely different understanding.

Especially now, when we are not taking Communion (Eucharist/Love Feast) in the communal way we have in the recent past, it is even more important to understand the gravitas of it. It isn’t just a little juice and a wafer (or bread)…it is the Word of God.

※Prayer※

Lord, John Wesley taught us that your feast is a means by which you deliver your grace to us. Let us not take it for granted and approach your banquet table with thanksgiving [eucharistia]. Amen.

※Questions※

1) How would you explain the why of Communion to a non-believer? How do you explain “eating flesh and drinking blood” without it sounding weirder than it already does?

2) Thinking of the king’s feast (Matthew 22:1–14), what does this tell you about coming to “the table” for communion?

2020 08 20
Whose Crown?

1 Samuel 8:1–22; Mark 10:35–45; 1 Corinthians 1:20–25

One cannot say the beginning of the fall of Israel was at the point they demanded a king. God pointed this out to disappointed Samuel. Israel’s “desire” for a king showed that Israel’s heart continued to not focus on God.

Samuel’s sons were a mess. In no way did they honor God or their father. Just like many of us, and the world, the Israelites were looking at humanity rather than God.

The failure of the Israelites wasn’t that they didn’t want Samuel’s sons in charge. That was actually wisdom. What they didn’t want, apparently, was a spiritual leader like Samuel. They wanted a “normal” king.

When God tells Samuel that the Israelites were against God, God makes it clear that it isn’t Samuel’s fault. The hearts of the Israelites are at fault. What happens, though, is that while they get want, they want, it does eventually become a “be careful what you wish for.”

The path of king never really ends for the Israelites. Eventually, the kingdom splits into 2. The Northern Kingdom (confusingly also called, Israel) eventually disappears. The Southern Kingdom (called Judah) remains, but over the years of exile and conquest never really stops having a king.

By the time of Jesus, the “king” (Herod) really is just a governmental flunky of Rome. The Gentiles and their quests for power (a constant theme of the Roman Empire) are what Jesus is likely referring to when he talks to the disciples. His point being who wants to live like that. Jesus had a better way.

The better way was the way of God’s love (not just generic human love) of both sacrifice and discipline. What need of worldly government and power would such a person have?

When we focus too much on worldly power, we miss the reality that Jesus turned power upside down. If we focus on the world’s ways, we succumb to the foolishness of the world, rather than living in and through the wisdom of God.

When we rely on the world, we make the same mistake the Israelites did…we choose a king (even if it’s only for 4 years).

※Prayer※

Lord Jesus, as we try to live out being faithful citizens of this world, help us to remember our deeper and truer citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What are some reasons you think the Israelites wanted a king “like the other nations”?

2) In what ways does the US political scene look at the president as King? What does that teach us about our (and our nation‘s) heart?

3) How might you live out the upside-down kingdom that Jesus brought to us?

2020 08 10
Using Ways

Luke 16:1–9

This is one of those interesting parables.

I knew a small business owner who taught a Sunday School lesson on this passage. He was quite honest that he hated it. As a small business owner, he could not understand the apparent praise for a person who reduced what was owed.

This is understandable. He viewed this as stealing by the manager and by those who owed the rich man. In most respects, he (the small business owner) was right.

The rich man is more the vehicle of the story. The first thing to recognize is that the rich man received an accusation. That’s it. In Jewish law, it took 2 or 3 witnesses to convict.

Jesus tells the story in such a way that we understand that there is truth to the accusation. Of course, the manager freaking out pretty much made it clear that there was a lot of truth in that accusation.

There are two really important things to learn from this particular parable.

The first is Jesus’ admonition to use the ways of the world wisely to gather friends. This does not mean that Jesus is suggesting theft or unGodly methods. Jesus is suggesting using the world’s ways (i.e., books, TV, radio, the internet) to make friends and to influence others.

This is good advice. In fact, without being open to the world’s ways, we often have no common ground with which to open conversations that lead to God. The world’s ways include business, politics, education, and pretty much everything. Yes, let’s use it all to bring people to God!

The second piece is often overlooked. I have certainly overlooked it.

The rich man and even the manager are successful in the world. We often focus on that, which shows our own hearts.

The people for whom the manager reduced the debt were the poor. We have to remember that our concept of middle-class is historically a pretty recent one. Most of these people owed debts that they may never be able to pay.

They would be, effectively, owned.

Why is this important? Well, the underlying implication is that the poor will have the eternal dwellings (i.e., heaven), and the only way the rich man or (specifically) the manager will have a place in eternity is through those that he gave mercy.

The concept of “class warfare” predates Karl Marx by centuries. While this passage and conclusion would seem to reinforce such a concept, at the same time, all things are possible with God, especially with a contrite heart.

※Prayer※

Heavenly Father, may we—your children—be always looking for ways to use the world’s ways to expand your family, kingdom, and glory. Amen.

※Questions※

1) What do you think of the rich man and his response to the manager’s initiative?

2) What ways of the world can you think of that you can use to bring people to God?

2020 08 04
One of the Fam

Matthew 12:46–50; John 14:18–26

The passage from John would have created a rather large stir in the culture. Jesus publicly equated non-blood relations as equal to familial relations.

The family was first in the culture. A good way to think of it is how a person is called in many Asian countries. The family name comes before the personal/individual name. One only calls another by their individual name by permission (accepted into a close relational circle) or by blood.

Americans and other Western cultures might tend to equate this with Mr., Mrs., and Ms. However, that is not the same, nor are they intended to be. Modern Western cultures (except for the remaining nobility, perhaps) do not hold the family in the same way. That is not a knock against Western Culture, just merely a reflection of differences.

It should was highly likely that mom and brothers had one of two responses, 1) there goes the crazy kid again, 2) WE are his family, not THESE people.

It’s not that Jesus was disrespecting his family, and certainly not his mother. Jesus was redefining what it meant to be a member of his family, which was not exclusive to his mother (and father) and brothers. This new family included them; it just included a bunch of others (like you and me).

As Jesus was completing his final discourse with his disciples, he told them that they were not orphans, nor were they abandoned. This is, again, family language. How severe their separation was from their families at that point or later is conjecture.

The use of the family language tells us that something was happening there. The concept of what is family was changing. The boundaries of familial blood were replaced with the boundaries of God’s saving work on the cross.

※Prayer※

Lord, we thank you that you have called us into a family larger than we can imagine. Help us remember that we are indeed family, despite our many differences. May our lives together be ones of love that draw more into your family. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Have you ever been party to the breaking of family bonds (either by you or others)? What were the various reactions?

2) If you were Mary or Jesus’ brothers, what would your response have been, especially as Jesus’ response was so public?

3) Why is the concept of family (not the stereotypical “nuclear” family) so critical to the church and its people?

2020 07 20
Dividing Rightly

Luke 12:49–56; John 17:20–26 (read online ⧉)

Jesus’ words are definitely uncomfortable. They are intended to be. The image of warm cuddly Jesus is great in pictures and in our hearts. It also true. However, there is a hardness to Jesus that we try to ignore, for when we see it we often become afraid.

It is here in these words that some of our fears seem to be right there. Separation from family is a big one. In a culture where family was the primary social and survival network, dividing from one’s family was often a death sentence.

If you were to take Jesus’ words and put them in someone else’s mouth (for the sake of argument, President Trump), there would be many people who would immediately agree that this sounds like Trump. Trump, whether by his own actions and words or by the overwhelming dislike toward him by many seems to have fulfilled this.

Before you think that this is supporting or defending Trump, it is neither. It is actually a mirror. Our society, and in many ways the whole world, is divided just as these words of Jesus go.

If we view others as being part of the family of God (whether in our biological family, church family, city, state, country, continent, the world), these words had better be distressing! We are divided from our brothers and sisters in Christ, because of skin color, language, nationality. Not much of “be as one” as we ought to be.

In many respects, this is what makes faithful Christians dangerous to many powers. Loyalties that supersede the state is bad. Authoritarian countries have been known to keep or gather familial “hostages” to assure the return of scientists, teachers, politicians, athletes, and business leaders. Faithful Christianity is more dangerous insofar as keeping things within the state, yet strong ties outside of the state.

It’s likely you thought of one of those authoritarian nations. It’s not just authoritarian nations. We can look at the United States and see the tensions that go along with Christianity. Certain Christians are challenging the authority of the government around churches being closed for health safety. Many of these same Christians challenge the Patriotism and even the faith of those who question the government or the country in other circumstances.

This is not to point at a side, nor think that another side doesn’t have as bad or worse issues regarding faith, patriotism, and country.

Division under the direction and love of Jesus Christ isn’t bad. In fact, it is scriptural. However, within the division, there still needs to be unity of heart. This unity of heart is toward fellow members of the Body of Christ. We love them because God loves them.

When we question whether another’s motives are Christian, we first need to look in the mirror to make sure we are being Christian.

Remember, the love of each other (unity) is how the world knows that Jesus is in us and that Jesus was sent by the Trinity to the world. Our love for each other, especially in these times, is how the world can see that Jesus is love.

※Prayer※
God, you are love. As your children, we are to be love. Help us to be strong in love. Amen.

※Questions※
1) Arguing well and respectfully is a lost skill. Why do you think such a vital skill to a democracy, republic, and faith communities has been so deeply lost?
2) Why does arguing often devolve into issues of authority and power?

2020 06 21