Tag: tradition

Open Invite
Acts 8:26–40; Psalm 22:25–31; 1 John 4:7–21; John 15:1–8

In many respects, the story of the Ethiopian is one of my favorites. It, along with the Samaritan woman, reflects the love and grace of God.

Yesterday, in Amos 9:7, Cushite was used as a disparaging term toward the Israelites infidelity to God. A Cushite is what the Old Testament calls…an Ethiopian. So, the people group used to disparage the Israelites…can have a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.

Then there is another issue. The Ethiopian was a eunuch. Per the Law, a eunuch was not permitted in the Temple. Granted, tradition had redefined things a bit.

One thing often disappears in this is the reality that one cannot reproduce biologically when one is a eunuch. However, as a Christian one still produces children…spiritual ones (think Paul and Timothy).

The Ethiopian was already on the spiritual journey, for he was going to worship at the Temple. It means that he was a worshiping as a Jew. He was, then, almost there.

The Ethiopian is symbolic of just how outside of God’s “family” a person can be, and still be called into relationship. We could dismiss the so-called minor issues of the Ethiopian, however, the Law helped to define what was holy for the Jews.

So, this isn’t a minor thing. Instead, it shows that while God is holy and separate, God still makes a way for those whose hearts are open to the movement of the Holy Spirit. That’s pretty open. God’s grace is wide open.

※Reflection※
- Have you ever felt so separated from God, that God would never take you back?
- How would you explain this grace to a person who does not understand holiness?
※Prayer※

Jesus, you are the reason for this grace that we have been given. Thank you for what you did for us on the cross. Amen.
2021-05-02
Beyond Sight/Site
Psalm 119:9–16; Haggai 2:1–9, 20–23; John 12:34–50

Haggai and Zechariah were the two prophets that accompanied the Israelites from exile to home. Their primary focus was the restoration of Israel, not so much as a powerhouse, but as a people and nation of God, including both temple worship and the Davidic kingly line. Later on down the chronological line (beyond today’s readings), the temple is completed. However, the temple that was completed did not have the glory of the old one in physical status.

As Haggai’s words are considered canonical (i.e., verified as the action of God), then the Jews saw something much different than the literal word (often our temptation when we are reading). From a Jewish standpoint (especially Haggai’s traditionalist perspective), the temple isn’t so much the point as a people faithfully pursuing God with one of the signs being faithful worship as prescribed in the Old Testament. What does it matter what it looked like today (remember the original Temple was David’s plan, inspired by God, but not prescribed) when faithful worship and a God-fearing king were what was required?

That Haggai was seeing beyond the immediate temple and even beyond the immediate kingly line tells us that Jesus’ words were not without historical precedence (as some have claimed). As we look beyond Jesus’ time on earth, we can see the fulfillment of Haggai’s words, as faith in Jesus Christ has changed the world. Though, sadly, many of those who cried, “Lord, Lord,” were liars, murderers, and power-grabbers beyond the average struggling Christian.

Haggai’s understanding of a God-honoring relationship revolved around the temple. That is what tradition and the Scriptures taught. Haggai understood quite well, as he was coming from exile, that empty actions were not what was needed. It was actions that were firmly grounded in who God is, and that the Israelites were God’s chosen people.

While Jesus’ words may have seemed revolutionary at the time, Jesus did answer the “Christ will be with us forever” in a way unexpected, though by pure reason, it probably should have been an idea. The Christ was with the Children of God forever…in their souls, their temple to God. Thus a relationship through the temple was now very personal, and the Christ was with them.

Would Haggai have been able to recognize that Jesus Christ was the fulfillment of his prophecy in only a way that God could make it happen? Perhaps. We can only look at Haggai’s words and see Christ in retrospect.

※Reflection※
- What practices do you fulfill in relationship with God? How about in regards to the temple, both body and church?
- What do you think is comparable to the Davidic kingly line in regards to lively rightly before God?
- When was the last time you evaluated your habits through the lens of habit or “because you need to”? Why is it important?
※Prayer※

Lord, guide us ever deeper into meaningful and life-changing relationship with you. Amen.
2021-03-24
Journey Essentials
Psalm 107:1–3, 17–22; Numbers 20:22–29; John 3:1–13

Commentators have proposed many reasons why the event at Meribah warranted Aaron and Moses not making it into the Promised Land. The reason for the question probably has less to do with Moses than it does with Aaron. Aaron started making a golden calf when the Israelites were still fresh out of Egypt. Aaron rebelled against Moses. So, Aaron makes a little sense. It was Meribah, however, that was the deciding factor.

Regardless, there seems something peculiar and special about Aaron’s death. Moses and Eleazer (Aaron’s son) accompany Aaron to the place Aaron will die. Moses and Eleazer then witness (we can safely assume) Aaron’s death. The special aspect of this is the passing on of the legacy. Aaron would see his son wear the high priest attire, be anointed, and then die. Aaron was able to see that what he and Moses had the next generation to take their place (and Moses would have Joshua).

The passing off of the reigns as God intended is both a gift and a responsibility. There is a big drive to pass off the reigns to the “next generation” (and who that is depends on how old you are). This is indeed the goal. However, passing off a mess or a bad legacy is not fulfilling the responsibility that God has given us. Of course, blinding holding on is just as bad (and often worse).

We see some of this with how the Jewish tradition was passed to the next generation. Then the next generation would build upon that. The generation after that would build on some more. Not to put too fine a point on it, but when the wrong stuff is passed on and built on, we get the Winchester House of theology and relationship. If you’re not familiar with Winchester House, it was continually expanded and built upon by Sarah Winchester to supposedly appease all the spirits of all those killed by her husband’s invention of the repeating rifle (i.e., the Winchester rifle). There are staircases that go nowhere, doors that are useless, and other oddities. Its only use is a tourist attraction.

The purpose of a house is to provide protection and security, not to be an oddity whose only use is tourism. Religion and theology should be building up, improving, and understanding the relationship between humanity and God, not lead us into dead ends.

Jesus takes the passed on Jewish theology and turns it over and breaks it apart. Poor Nicodemus was quite confused by Jesus’ answer. We often look down on Nicodemus because he didn’t understand the obvious (to us) connection between baptism of water and of Spirit. Or we give him grief that in his confusion he didn’t approach Jesus (in a learning way) in the day. Instead, perhaps we ought to think of Nicodemus who was making sure he understood and making sure that the legacy he would pass on was right.

※Reflection※
- Of the faith/religion/theology that you have had passed you, what do you think needs to be stripped away to pass on a “cleaner” faith/religion/theology? Why?
- Of the faith/religion/theology that you have had passed you, what do think needs to be certainly passed on? Why? Is it biblically sound?
※Prayer※

Lord, as we look forward, help us to determine, with you as our guide, the best path to take, so that others may follow the path that leads to you. Amen.
2021-03-13
Becoming Light
Jeremiah 30:12–22; John 12:36–43

Perhaps this has been said before, but an important lesson learned through Celebrate Recovery was, “hurt people hurt people.” When people are hurting, they lash out. Sometimes the pain is stress. Often it is thousands of little things (and sometimes only a few) that pile up all at once. Our individual emotional and spiritual history is full of small wounds. Most of the time, we function well despite them. Other times, we fall completely apart.

God relays back to the Israelites all their woe and anguish. God explains how much of, really, is the accumulation of delayed consequences over the years. It is not that God is uncompassionate. It is that God is trying to retrain them to pursue God and not the world.

We can safely assume that many Israelites said with their hearts and/or their mouths, “God, if you really loved us…” They judged God by the consequences of their actions. We are often no different, whether we blame God or others.

God acknowledges and identifies their pain. Many are lashing out at God because of their pain. Many, just like today, lash out at God for they cannot see clearly through their pain. God doesn’t leave it at that. God promises restoration.

What should catch our attention in the promises is, “You will be my people…” The Israelites were declared God’s people in Exodus, yet here is a future tense. The Israelites were no longer God’s people. It seems obvious, but for the Israelites, it wasn’t obvious that they were no longer God’s people.

The other implication here is that the blessing can be lost. For those of us in the Wesleyan-Arminian tradition, this isn’t a shock, but we often choose to forget it. The Israelites had lost it. This should not be taken to an antisemitic extreme (“Christians” have done too much of that). It should be viewed as a warning.

It is not that they didn’t regain the blessing, but one can look at the history that followed, and see that the blessing never returned to the way it had been. The rise and fall of Israel is a lesson for every believer.

Jesus’ words are the guidelines to follow. If you have the light (Jesus), believe in the light. This is the full-hearted belief and trust in God. This is not a “statement of belief.” It is a life of belief.

The CEB concludes with “that you might become people whose lives are determined by the light.” Other translations say something more familiar, “that you may become children of light.” Might is not coincidental. Might indicates that…you can lose it, or that you can walk away from it.

Your trust and relationship with God may be such that you are not able to understand why anyone would “lose” or “walk away” from Jesus. The Israelites wandered away from God. Judas Iscariot (who was with him for nearly 3 years) betrayed Jesus. It can happen.

※Reflection※
- Do you know anyone who “walked in the light” and then stopped? Do you know the pain of their story and/or why?
- How do you deal with the pain of people who know Jesus? How do you deal with the pain of people who don’t know Jesus?
※Prayer※

Jesus, help us to walk in the light and to call others to your light, too. Amen.
2021-03-03
Billboard or Reflection
Isaiah 58:1–12; Psalm 51:1–17; 2 Corinthians 5:20b–6:10; Matthew 6:1–6, Matthew 6:16–21

Today is Ash Wednesday. This ancient church tradition goes beyond Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox. It a time of self-reflection. Many call it a time of self-mortification. This is why it is often a time of fasting (of varying sorts). Truthfully, the fasting is often something that should be done anyway as a form of self-improvement or just a matter of separating oneself from the immediate to dedicate time to the truly important.

The words in Isaiah allude to this. Sacrificing (e.g., fasting) because it is the religious thing to do is not the point. It seems, in fact, that religious sacrificing is actually an affront to God when one’s life around it is not God-honoring. That should be a gut check (no pun intended) for us all.

Pursuit of the knowledge of God without pursuit of the heart of God is often an empty pursuit. Yes, we can learn more facts about God. That doesn’t mean we actually know God. God wants us to know God, not merely know of God.

2020 was a banner year of self-mortification realization. From politics, to race, to gender, to the police, to riots, to COVID, there was so much that God seemed to be telling the church. The church has been too busy, for too long, doing the religious sacrificing without knowing the heart of God. Looking back on 2020, you may well have an idea of what God wants you to put to death.

From an Isaiah point of view, 2020 was a great year! All that extra stuff (much of it dead) just needs to be cut off! The church, and people in general, still want to cling to what is dead, rather than lean into what and who gives life.

The Psalmist though cries out the Lenten cry, “HAVE MERCY ON ME!” While Lent is to be a time of putting un-Christ-like things and behaviors to death, it is such a time of joy, for God had mercy on us. This mercy, and the joy because of it, is part of our witness to the world. It is part of that which makes us Christian.

Some churches will have Ash Wednesday in the morning, so that the congregants go into the world proclaiming Christ. It could seem to be a billboard of, “look how religious I am!” For some communities that may actually be the case. On the other hand, Ash Wednesday is a “stamp of strangeness” for most people. If you were to go to work (whether in person or on a video call) with a big black cross on your forehead, you might get some strange looks. Others might even mock you. Yet, it is a chance that it might open the door to talking about Jesus.

It isn’t bad to wear a cross of ashes, nor is it bad to fast. It is about the why and the rest of your life.

※Reflection※
- What does a cross of ashes mean or represent to you? Why?
- What have you decided to “put to death” for Lent? Why that? If nothing, why nothing?
- How do mercy and joy fit into your understanding of Lent?
※Prayer※

Lord, as we begin this time of reflection, help us to truly be reflective and not reflexive. Grant us the grace to see more of you and to become more like you. Most of all, help us to reflect your light into the world. Amen.
2021-02-17
God and Relationships
1 Corinthians 7:25–40

God and Relationships is a pretty big topic. First of all, we have to set our starting point. God is a relational God. God created humanity in relationship with God.

The first human was Adam. One thing to keep in mind with Adam is that according to some translators and some Jewish traditions was without gender upon initial creation. It wasn’t until the “rib” was removed from Adam that the division of gender came about. This flies in the face of much of the Christian tradition, I understand, but it further emphasizes “two shall become one” and that it occurs (with the realm of Eden, before the fall) between man and woman.

This seeming aside is also important as God declared that it was not good for humanity to be alone. This is peculiar in that if God is in a relationship with them, then the human wasn’t alone. Even at the point of Eden (again, before the Fall), God understood (even created) the situation that a human would need human fellowship. It’s odd to say that God wasn’t enough, yet human history shows that there is something fundamentally different in human-to-human relationship versus human-to-God relationship.

Therefore, with all of this before us, there is a tension from the beginning of man and woman, their relationship with God, and their relationship with each other. The inherent need of humanity for relationship also extends, eventually, to fellow humans. God desires a relationship with humanity. Humanity needs relationship with humanity (even we strong introverts).

This may seem to be a lot of preamble. Human relationships are at the core of Paul’s message to the church.

We primarily focus on marriage because it is culturally (and often personally) significant. There is good reason to focus on it. There is also good reason to ignore it in these verses.

Paul makes it clear that while he is spiritually led regarding the church and the gospel (more at the end of these verses), he also has no clear direction from the Holy Spirit (at the beginning of the verses). This means that these verses, in particular, need to be viewed in context. Paul’s perspective is that Jesus would be returning shortly (days, weeks, months, maybe a year or so). Paul has an end-times view. Why, from Paul’s perspective, would you confuse the little remaining time in your life with that kind of intimate and focused human relationship?

Paul writes in 2 Timothy 3:16–17, “All Scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” When we take context into consideration, we must also keep this passage in mind.

Paul’s highest concern is the Corinthians’ (and our) relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Paul recognizes that often our human relationships hinder our relationship with God. This can be a result of trauma from childhood to the spouse who has changed (or us who changed). Even healthy relationships may distract or interfere with a relationship with God. An unhealthy relationship will hinder it even more.

Our relationships with fellow humans really do deeply affect our relationship with God. One could even go so far as to say that if your relationships with humans are broken, so is your relationship with God. Yep, that one stings.

※Reflection※
- What human relationships did you think of as being damaged? How might those relationships inhibit your relationship with God?
- What human relationships can you think of that are good or great? How might they inhibit your relationship with God?
※Prayer※

God, we often say you are first in our lives, but the human relationships in our lives sometimes say different. Grant us discernment, healing, and grace to make them be what is best regarding our relationship with you. Amen.
2021-02-01
We Love Talking About It
1 Samuel 15:7–15; Acts 5:1–11

Every pastor’s favorite sermon topic is tithing/giving. Every pastor absolutely loves talking about you are to give freely to God by giving to the church and other missional activities.

In case you’re wondering, that was sarcasm. Most pastor’s hate it. And, most people hate hearing it, because they often feel guilty about it. Hatred of the topic may be a veneer over the fear of Christianly dealing with money.

John Wesley had a famous sermon on money. From it was gained a saying, “…Gain all you can…Save all you can…Give all you can….” Part of the problem with this saying is all the “…” that are part of it. They show that there is far more than just these 12 words. The context of each set of 4 words makes a lot of difference in how one interprets them.

“All you can” is the real crux of the issue. “All you can” at what cost? John Wesley had a distinct moral code regarding “Gain all you can.” Some of today’s business owners might be okay. Others might not. Still others would not be able to figure it out.

John Wesley was concerned that people who sought to gain would do it at the expense of others. In many respects, we could call capitalism with a heart. On the other hand, we could view it as capitalism with a long view for the benefit of humanity.

If the long view of a business, and its profit, is for the benefit of humanity, that’s a good start. Destroying the environment would be harming God’s creation, so it would fail Wesley’s test, too. Much of our modern profiting, though, is a lot grayer.

Saving is the next thing. Saving is not hoarding. Saving is more along the lines of protection of the wellbeing of one’s family and self. Hoarding is gathering as much as one can and preventing others from gaining.

In John Wesley’s era, far too many people owed money. It was a way of life. For some, it was the only way to feed their families. Today we think of credit card debt, home mortgages, student loans, and car loans. The amount of most of those loans could have been greatly reduced with good planning and a willingness to delay gratification. This is (for example) one area that the Church could be both a better witness of action and of prophecy.

“Give all you can” can be a guilt trip. Often, even those of us in the Wesley tradition use it or perceive it as more of a guilt scale. Wesley, while big on charity, didn’t seem to be particularly guilt-driven. However, by some accounts, he failed the “save all you can” for his family, for he gave all he could.

Gain(earn)/save/give is a balancing act.

Many Christians are like Saul. “Oh, I’ll give the difficult or unwanted stuff to God.” Sounds like many people who give broken stuff to a church. The church then often must pay to dispose of it. Saul turned a commandment from God into we’ll benefit, oh, and maybe God will like a little bit, too.

The path of Ananias and Sapphira was “look at what we did. We gave everything (oh, except that part we kept back).” They wanted the accolades about the total sacrifice, rather than just giving freely and joyfully. If they’d given 90% and kept 10% and were honest about it, everything would have been fine.

Far too many preachers (and non-profit type) folks speak about a person’s checkbook as the litmus test. It isn’t. It would be nice if the 10% rule (from the time of Israel) had been sufficient. It wasn’t. When a person has a rule (10%), the heart doesn’t have to go along.

It is the motive behind our use of money that is the point of tithing and giving.

God created the world. God already has the money (as if God needed it). God wants our heart.

※Reflection※
- When a church or non-profit person starts talking about money, what’s your first response? How about an entrepreneur, investor, banker, or politician?
- What is so captivating about money and stuff?
※Prayer※

Jesus, may you be the Lord of our heart. May the spirit of mammon in us be overwhelmed and transformed by the sanctification of Holy Spirit. Amen.
2021-01-18
Not Yours, But God’s
Psalm 69:1–5, 30–36; Genesis 17:1–13; Romans 4:1–12

“Abram” translates to “exalted ancestor”. “Abraham” translates to “ancestor of a multitude”. While Ismael was Abraham’s son (the son he had with Sarah’s servant), it didn’t quite connect with Abraham as Ishmael wasn’t a result of him and Sarah (his wife and love).Both names had their own sting. “Exalted ancestor” requires more than just the son of a servant, but grandchildren. “Ancestor of a multitude” probably stung worse, for that would seem to imply even more. He had only one.

Yet, as Scriptures attest to (and Paul recapitulates) Abraham trusted God, and Paul notes that God “attributed” to Abraham righteousness. The strong implication for many commentators was that God “considered” Abraham righteous because of his faith/trust, not because of his actions. In addition, many infer that it also means that God viewed Abraham as righteous in spite of any possible failings or sins that Abraham had.

Circumcision was the act that in some respects “remembered” the covenant that God made with Abraham. One could view it as God choosing Abraham’s descendants, setting them aside, and treating them as righteous, even when they weren’t. The Israelites were set aside for God. The males bore the mark.

The similarity between circumcision and baptism are often drawn. Especially in the Christian traditions that baptize infants, it is quite simple. Even in the traditions that perform believer’s baptism, the imputation of righteousness is still there.

When we are baptized (as infant or believer), the righteousness we receive is that of Jesus. It isn’t ours. Just as in circumcision, or even infant baptism, the promise is performed before the child has a choice.

The reality is that almost the entirety of our relationship with God…the entirety of our becoming more like God…is because of God.

Paul draws baptism and circumcision together. Paul needed his Jewish brethren to understand that baptism was a valid entrance into the family of God. He also needed the Gentiles to understand that baptism was part of tradition that went back in time, tying them to a tradition and people and God they were only beginning to understand.

※Reflection※
- What traditions family, cultural, and/or religious tie you to the past? Why is being rooted in the past helpful when going forward?
- The majority of church traditions/theology (there are outliers) believe in only one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. Why do you think that is?
※Prayer※

God, your word goes to a past we do not fully know. Your word also goes forward to a time we cannot see. Thank you for the guidance that your word provides us, and may we share the gift of your word to others. Amen.
2021-01-10
Peace-Filled Traditions

Matthew 15:1–9; Luke 11:42–46

Yesterday (or the weeks prior to it), all Americans had the opportunity to participate in a great tradition…voting. Regardless of whether your candidates won or lost, there is something great in this tradition. People choosing their leaders is a great gift, and should not be squandered.

As Halloween and All Saints’ Day have passed, so to have the traditions that go with them. Next in our list of traditions are Thanksgiving (for Americans; for Canadians, it has passed), Advent, Christmas, and New Year.

Many of the rules and traditions of the Jews were based upon the lunar calendar, or as observations of past significant events. Their traditions were formational. In other words, part of what made a person grow into being a Jew were the traditions. In many respects, despite the diaspora of the Jews, that is still the case around the world.

The US acted, for a time, as if if were of a tradition. However, in the last few decades, the US has discovered that its identity and traditions are no longer what they were. Many are upset about this, and are grieving and angry.

On the other hand, this is also the opportunity to develop new traditions and a new identity forged through the mutual pain of discontent, isolation, anger, and even despair. It doesn’t sound particularly pleasant. It hasn’t been, and probably won’t be for a while.

For many, some “great” US traditions felt more like oppression and suppression. The traditions also felt disparaging. To others they were/are part of a past that they couldn’t support.

At the time of Jesus, many Jews felt that they could not live under the traditions imposed by their leaders. Jesus indeed called the leaders out on this. The leaders had had a tradition passed down by Moses. In an attempt to “perfect” it, they made it worse. They made it unlivable.

As we move forward (for that is the only direction we can go), the church has a huge opportunity to help shape the new traditions that are to be formed. Of course, many of our own traditions will have to be challenged, and that will be painful and hard.

※Prayer※

Lord, help us to be healers and peacemakers. Help us to be bearers of peace that passes all understanding. Amen.

2020-11-03
Incomplete Armor

Psalm 27; Zechariah 10:12; Ephesians 6:10–18

This passage from Ephesians is one of those common favorites. Building and putting on the armor of God is still a popular activity for children. As a formation tool, it was and remains powerful.

From the point of the Ephesians, they were very familiar with the attire of the Roman soldiers. Ephesus was an important city in the region. The Roman soldiers would be stationed there. With its importance, many military excursions would start and end in Ephesus.

However, while Paul grasped a powerful visual (and, for modern children, a reinforcing activity), it wasn’t complete. As far as Paul was concerned, he delivered what he needed for conveying deep truths to the Ephesians.

Yet, there is still something missing. When I was younger, people often thought I was an “Army brat”. Even to this day, some assume I’m ex-military. Most of this is a childhood affection (with, yes, a lot of military tradition in the family). So, when I look at Paul’s list, I’m a bit bothered.

There are 2 significant pieces that are missing from Paul’s list: the javelin (or bow, depending on the unit) and the kilt. Also, certain Roman ensembles had shin guards, too (that makes 3).

What does that matter, you might ask? The javelin (again, or bow) was used for long-ranged attack; the javelin could also be used as a defensive tool against cavalry. We could use the long-range aspect as a “look ahead” and “be prepared” for what is coming. In other words, don’t just react to the world; be prepared to confront it.

Regarding defense, the javelin would need to be set against the ground to be effective. Again, be ready for what is coming toward you.

The kilt? Other than cultural Scottish attire, it protected the lower area of the body. It may not seem like a kilt could protect much, but much of the strength of the lower body is centered in that area. Wounds would deeply affect effectiveness. From a modesty sense, well, that’s probably obvious. That could represent purity.

Purity in this day and age is hard. Putting on the armor of purity may be more essential than we realize.

The shin guards are a little harder. They do keep you from getting kicked, and they would protect you from ramming your leg into a coffee table (you winced, didn’t you?). So, perhaps we could look at the shin guards at that which protects us (somewhat) from our own stumbling.

There is a fun addition to the helmet. Normally, the helmet was unadorned. However, during parades, the higher one’s rank the crest on the helmet would be brightly colored. Kind of similar to the flames of Pentecost, perhaps?

※Questions※

1) Which armor piece is most significant for you? Why?

2) If you were to choose aspects of the spiritual life that the 3 additional pieces would represent, what would they be? Why?

※Prayer※

God, thank you for the vision and wisdom of your servant Paul whose words, inspired by you, guide us today. Amen.

2020-10-28