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: united

  • Is Swearing Bad?

    Is Swearing Bad?

    Leviticus 5:4–6; Numbers 30:10–16; Deuteronomy 12:29–32; Judges 11:29–40; Matthew 5:37 (read online ⧉)

    No, we’re not talking about bad language. We are talking about making and “taking” oaths.

    All elected politicians take oaths regarding following the law and upholding the respective (state or US) constitution. Peace Officers, Military service people, doctors all swear oaths when formally taking the position of their training/office.

    Oaths are not small. Oaths are not equal to promises. Oaths tend more toward the covenantal side of things. This means that there should be a depth to them of body, mind, and soul that is far more than just a promise. Some people do take promises to the oath standard, but most people do not.

    Oaths will often also have a penalty that goes with breaking them. Promises generally do not (except for the diminishment of your “good” name). Also, oaths will usually invoke a greater power. In the United States and even in a number of “post”-Christian countries, that greater power is still God.

    God. The “special” ingredient of an oath.

    Oaths (or swearing, the right kind) are not a bad thing. Rash (or emotional or reactive) oaths, however, are. As the first passage indicates, there is a kind of guilt associated with a rash oath, and that is whether it is to do good or to do bad. That, in and of itself, should indicate the weight God holds for oaths.

    While Numbers makes a wife’s or daughter’s oath the responsibility of the husband/father, it is still an oath. Part of it is a cultural assumption that the man would indeed ultimately bear the responsibility of the oath anyway. The wife and daughter are of his household, and thus his responsibility.

    Even how the man is supposed to deal with their oaths is important. He has to be quick and discerning about voiding them or owning them. He is responsible. He would also likely make the oathmaker bear some responsibility, too. The point is that oaths are not to be taken lightly.

    Jephthah provides the stunning example of why rash oaths are a really bad idea. The prologue to Jephthah’s story is the passage in Deuteronomy about sacrificing children, and that God really hates it. Think about those who would run out of the city to greet the victorious Jephthah…it would probably be someone from his family.

    Jephthah made an oath. His daughter paid the price for his oath. This was not a God-honoring oath, nor a God-honoring sacrifice. That Jephthah was a judge for Israel makes this tale even that much more tragic, and even less God-honoring.

    When Jesus says to say yes or no, he is referring to a practice whereby oaths were binding based upon what they were sworn on. Money won. Forget the sacrificial offering. Forget the altar (that made the money sacred). It was the money.

    It’s not that Jesus says there is no space for oaths, it’s that the space for oaths is much smaller than it used to be. Invoking God really should be between you and God, and not a third party.

    There is also another small lesson, and it is good to keep when we are all in a state (pandemic and stay-at-home) where emotional responses are likely to result in rash oaths. This is a time when many people will turn deeply to God (and we celebrate it). In so doing, however, they often become (positively) overwhelmed and make rash oaths.

    Many of these rash oaths are made to God. God wants faith- and trust-filled oaths. Rash oaths might be faith- and trust-filled at the moment. It is over time that the extent of faith and trust is tested. These are the oaths that God values.

    ※ Prayer ※
    Gracious God, may the words of our mouths and hearts bring honor and glory to you. May these poor words of ours warm your heart as we follow the path you guide us. Amen.

    ※ Questions ※
    1) Have you ever sworn an oath? Why? What was it’s result/consequence?
    2) How would you define the difference between promise, oath, and covenant?
    3) What is the most rash decision you have made? What was the result?

  • Throne of Hearts

    Psalm 47; Job 23:3–12; Job 26:2–14; John 1:43–51 (read online ⧉)

    The Stone of Scone is a stone that supposedly all the “legitimate” rulers of Scotland were/are crowned on. After one of the many wars between England and Scotland, the English King Edward I took the stone to England, where it generally remained until 1996 as the coronation “cushion” of the (soon) British Crown. One of the legends of the stone was that when the “real” heir to the Scottish throne was crowned, the stone would groan.

    The legend, of course, probably had more to “prove” that the English nobility had no “true” right to the Scottish crown than anything else. There was also the knowledge that the stone’s home was really Scotland, but became the cushion of the usurpers.

    Thrones were/are the symbols of legitimate authority over a nation or community. There is still plenty of royalty who sit on thrones. As monarchies die off and lose their importance, thrones have been replaced.

    In the United States, the Oval Office could be considered at least a throne room. If you were to look at the arrangements of the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Supreme Court, you will see similarities between the chairs of leaders and thrones. That isn’t by chance.

    We seek throne rooms and thrones. Not always for ourselves, but to understand who is in charge, and often who we can blame.

    Job seeks the throne of God to plead his case (another reason people seek thrones). Job believes that were he only to get there and plead his case, everything would get better.

    Job defends or describes God with many positive terms and observations of God’s power. Yet, Job talks about God obscuring the throne. This could be an observation, however, where it is among Job’s words, it is likely a complaining observation (God is making it hard to find him).

    With God, though, while it may seem while God is far away or hidden, it is often our hearts that are truly far away. Job’s story is not about God’s lack of presence, it is more about Job’s faith.

    We see just how close God is to us through the life of Jesus. Jesus calls people into his presence. His throne is with him at all times. Jesus drew people to him that dismissed on the very outset (such as Nathanael). Sometimes the throne we are seeking is right there next to us, but we are looking for something that God does not always make known the way we want God to. God’s throne could be the sun, the Milky Way, the person next to you, in your heart and soul.

    The last “throne room”, though, is the one we like the least. It often reminds us of how small we are. It also reminds us of how spiteful or petty we are. That’s not the throne room we are looking for. It is also the throne room that tells us that we have far to go; we are not there yet.

    Prayer

    Dear Heavenly Father, help us to see the throne you occupy in our lives. May we see your majesty and royalty. Jesus, thank you for the cleansing work in our lives, help us to keep the Godly throne room in our hearts and souls clean. Holy Spirit, guide our work so that we do it all for God’s glory and not our own. Amen.

    Questions

    1) How do you envision a throne room?

    2) If you had to choose the most important throne room of the world, where would it be? Who would be in it? (Note: context of the world; God/Jesus is not this answer)

    3) What kind of person draws you closer to them? What does that tell you what you look for in regards to God? What way might that mean you are not looking to God?

  • Roads and Gates

    Psalm 113; Matthew 7:13–23; John 14:1–7 (read online ⧉)

    “I am the way, the truth, and the life…” is often presented in the same vein as “…the narrow gate.” Yet, “the way” isn’t the same. The Greek ὁδός (hodos) is a relatively generic term that is used to mean a wide road to a narrow road. The real gist is that it is well-used and that it connects places (often other “ways”).

    When Jesus speaks of being “…the way, the truth, and the life…” we really need to use its larger context to explain it. This is more of a “pastoral” comfort statement than a rigid “follow me or else” statement. The surrounding verses seek to soothe the anxieties of the disciples regarding their choice to follow Jesus. They needed to know they had made the right choice. In the same passage regarding being the way, Jesus tells them not to be troubled, and that the Father’s house has many rooms. Jesus reassures them that they know the way.

    It’s sad, yet understandable, how this passage became interpreted the way of exclusivity instead of compassion, mercy, and love. Often used to show that any way other than Jesus is destined for Hell, this passage is intended to show that God has grace for everyone as they do their best to accompany and follow Jesus through life.

    Rupertus Meldenius once wrote, “In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity.” This would seem to be the heart of Jesus’ words to his disciples when he talked about being the way, the truth, and the life. Oddly, enough, this leads us to Jesus’ words from Matthew 7:13–14.

    The narrowness of the gate and the difficulty of the road comes into play here. It is this passage that likely transformed a passage of grace into a passage of exclusion. However, that doesn’t mean we get to ignore this passage.It is this passage, however, that provides the boundaries of grace. Too much openness blinds us to the truth of God. This is the narrow gate. The difficult road is the urgings of the world pushing and pulling us toward “easier”, “more loving”, “more accepting” ways of living. This kind of thinking is along the lines of “if it doesn’t hurt others, then it’s fine.” The narrow gate and difficult road do not allow that.

    Jesus, you lived the life of a human. Give us the holy wisdom not to follow the world that does not know you. Guide us through the narrow gate and along the difficult road. We thank you for the Holy Sprit, which acts as the compass, guide, and counselor. Help, Holy Spirit, to be filled with you so that we walk in the way of life. Gracious Father, we thank you for you loving kindness that shared of yourself through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. May we honor that in our lives. Amen.

    1) What do you think of Rupertus Meldenius’ words? Do you think that they are right, or wrong? Why or why not?

    2) Why is the openness of the “way” of John 14:1–7 important when we talk about the “narrow gate” of Matthew 7:13? Which do you think is more important? Why?

    3) How can people (especially the church) be united, yet provide liberty and charity?

  • Blowing Smoke Into Our Own Eyes

    Isaiah 30:8–13 (read online ⧉)

    Hearing the truth about ourselves is often uncomfortable. We like to hear good stuff, but do our best to avoid that feels bad, or might cause us to look at ourselves badly. We are not alone. When Isaiah is sent to confront the Israelites with a bad report, you can imagine how well it was received.

    Who wants to be called a rebellious child, except for those who take pride in being rebelling. Rare is the person who wants to be called deceptive. Yet rebellion and deception can often be attributed to ourselves. It never feels good to confront it. The reality is that rebellion and deception often go hand-in-hand. Where we can lose a little bit of the meaning is that sometimes the deceiving is of ourselves, leading us into a life or choice of rebellion. That’s where the words in Isaiah go. People didn’t want to hear the truth. They want to be lied to rather than having to deal with the truth.

    In the current separated world that is the “United” States of America, there are many prophetic voices speaking out with the heart of Jesus Christ. However, even they have become blind. Whole swaths of people are challenged for a single point of politics or policy, while their own politics or policy have their own parts that are not in line with Jesus Christ. In many respects, the Israelites had it easy.

    Christians are called to love, starting with one another. Yet, what is love? How is loved lived out? In fact, our understanding of love may very well affect the love of Jesus Christ that comes from us. That is potentially the biggest problem of all. People can disagree on the right (and Christian) way to help a person get out of poverty (for example). Their perspectives may be very different. That doesn’t mean that one is right and one is wrong. Our world is very much playing the zero-sum game. In other words, somebody loses. All too often, Jesus Christ gets lost in the mix and noise.
    The church and its people must begin to focus on Jesus Christ. That’s obvious, you may say, but it really isn’t. If you love Jesus Christ, you can’t support (some person). That’s the way things are currently going. We no longer show grace and love to those of different politics. We’ve lost our first love.

    1) Think of your least favorite politician. Can you say, I love you (their name)? Do you think Jesus can?

    2) Redemption and love flow through the Scriptures. How should that affect our view of ourselves? How should that affect our views of others?

    3) Why is it important that politics can play a useful role in expanding the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth? What is the (ongoing) danger with that same thing?

  • Relating Relationally

    Genesis 24:1–27, Ruth 2:1–16, 1 Corinthians 7:1–9, Hebrews 11:13–22 (read online ⧉)

    Arranged marriages are nothing new. Many arranged marriages were and are political, financial, or just friends “knowing” their children should be together. The story of Isaac and Rebekah doesn’t quite fall into those lines, but it is still an arranged marriage. Just like any marriage, there were ups and downs, good days and bad. From a generational and legacy standpoint, marriage was a core component. The servant in this story was the one who had to trust and rely on God for the journey to be a success, and to be able to go to his master (Abraham) with his task fulfilled.

    The story of Ruth is considered a success as she was faithful…and landed a husband. By landing a husband, she obtained personal security. She also obtained a legacy for her husband (and by extension, her deceased father-in-law) and her mother-in-law, Naomi. That he was honorable and rich didn’t hurt, of course. In a culture where women were not highly valued, this was a significant win for Ruth and Naomi. For the women, marriage was not just success, it was safety and identity. In the story, too, was trusting God. In this case, it was Ruth (the Moabite foreigner) who trusted and relied on God. Naomi (the Israelite) has lost her trust in God. God’s faithfulness to Ruth, however, did seem to have restored Naomi’s trust.

    In this day and age and culture, we have been spared (generally) the arranged marriages of old, though they still happen. Marriage has long been a mainstay and cultural and societal bedrock for generations, and not just in American or even Western culture, but in most cultures and ages. Yes, there are exceptions. They are few. Whether you view the current changes regarding marriage in the United States as good or bad, it has changed. There is an important reason to understand that, Americans deeply value marriage. That should give hope, but it should also make us cautious. When we raise marriage to such a high level (which we have), people quest and ache for it. Then they will pursue it. Then they will fail. This is not to say that we should not view marriage highly, but that our view of it should not be over that of widows, widowers, and singles. In fact, it is not unreasonable to conclude that much of the failure of marriages are not just unpreparedness, it is also suitableness.

    There often comes a judgemental tendency regarding this in Evangelical Christian circles. This is certainly not exclusive of Evangelical Christianity, as there is a religion that teaches (or at least use to) that a single man over the age of 25 to be a danger to society. Holding up relationships, especially romantic ones, as the panacea of all things is setting up relationships to not be able to bear the weight of expectations. Once relationships become gods, not only does God have no place, but relationships try to make up the lack of God by putting it all into the relationships.

    The other struggle is the one Paul is concerned about, and that is sexual morality. In other words, if you can’t handle your “needs”, then get married. Paul seems to put marriage as below singleness. Think about that for a moment. Paul, often elevated (rightfully) as a “doctor” of the Church, did not necessarily view marriage as anything more than a way to avoid sexual immorality. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for earthly marriage. On the other hand, Paul did say that Christ and the Church were Groom and Bride, so it’s not as if marriage wasn’t useful. Still, it wasn’t a ringing endorsement. Both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches developed monasteries and convents for those called to it. This was an elevation of singleness to the glory of God.

    Those who a single, widowed, or married are to love and value each other equally, not based upon marital status. All statuses have to rely on God for fulfillment, and none are completely fulfilling for anyone, at least not without God. It is trusting God, when we cannot see the path before us, and trusting God when our relational desires are not fulfilled. Relationships fill holes inside each and every one of us.

    1) How do you view people who are in a different relational status than you are? Why? How does that fit into being framily together?

    2) How do you incorporate into your everyday life (i.e., not just at church) those who are in a different relational state than you?

    3) How do Paul’s words (in this passage) feel to you regarding your relational status?

  • What Promise?

    Psalm 146, Mark 13:14–27, Mark 13:32–33, Hebrews 11:13–22 (read online ⧉)

    The New Year is no longer new. By now many New Year’s Resolutions are broken. People have already surrendered to their loss. Often people telegraph or expect their loss, and behave as if they have already lost. By God’s grace, many of those who went before, especially those that are revered in some aspect, didn’t behave the same way.

    The Founding Fathers (of the United States) were human beings. They were marred by sin and imperfection…just like us. The system they developed, a hybrid of multiple governmental ways of thinking, was an experiment. The Founding Fathers had many fears about this system they created. Oddly enough, on both sides of the political spectrum is a growing belief that it has failed. That it failed (or hasn’t yet, or won’t, or…) is not the question or issue, nor has it ever been. The amazing thing is that it was tried at all. That a bunch of (granted) well-educated “aristocratic” men were able to motivate others not as fortunate to take on the ruling empire of the world (at that time) is amazing. It actually means, a cynical point of view, means that nothing has changed. Still to take on the British Empire was insane. These same men feared that democracy would fail, no matter what fail-safes they put into the system. They did anyway. Were they going against the flow? Would failure be catastrophic? Yes to both. Again, they did it anyway.

    When the U.S. system was designed it really had no trust in princes nor did it really have trust in people. It’s odd, wouldn’t you say, to put the fate of your legacy in the hands of people you don’t really trust? Much of the angst of the current “feeling”* really boils down to putting our faith and trust in princes (and people) who haven’t really earned it. The ones that earned it are the ones we know, not usually someone on a website or a TV screen (though in this day and age that may no longer be so).

    While it is wise to not trust humankind without some serious testing and discernment, people still do it. We have to. We cannot survive being paranoid. However, during his prophetic statements, Jesus still advises people that there will be false messiahs and false prophets. Jesus advises that the end will come with God the Father decides, and that is not for anyone else to know. Despite these words, men and women for ages have declared “special” knowledge of the end. People then feel betrayed when the end doesn’t come.

    Those that know the end date, or those who will give us power or stuff or safety, we put a lot of trust in them. Then we become upset because they failed us. When it comes to politicians and leaders we really treat them like New Year’s Resolutions…something will go wrong. We have no real hope in them, yet we still feel disappointed. Yet, we should actually be relieved when they disappoint us. Whew! They’re human just like us. That is the point of the author of Hebrews, God is not human like us. God is far more. God is faithful. God fulfills his promises.

    1) What promise(s) of God do you hold onto?

    2) What promises of people do you hold onto?

    3) Why do you think we hold onto people’s promises, yet often turn away from God’s promises?

    Action: As you read the Scriptures this week, write down the verses that seem to be promises.

  • Evangelizing the Body

    Proverbs 15:1, Proverbs 25:15, Isaiah 40:10–14, Matthew 12:11–21 (read online ⧉)

    The mission statement of the Church of the Nazarene is, “to make Christ-like disciples in all nations.” In case you’ve forgotten, though you probably haven’t, one of the tasks of Christians is to make disciples. The mission statement of the Church of the Nazarene is really the call upon all Christians. For many years, the culture of the United States appeared to have a deep understanding of Christianity and had embraced it. The formulation of evangelism has been firmly rooted in that. Techniques such as the Romans Road and 4 Spiritual Laws were developed for that culture. If these techniques were so effective, the religious landscape of our country would be very different. It is not that they were not effective, it was just that the presentation of their effectiveness is questionable.

    The reality is that techniques that rely on a particular time, place, and culture will only be effective for a short time. The time that many were effective was relatively short. There are many, however, that still cling to these ways. Much of the reason is that they were simple and straight forward. On the front end, they also appeared effective in the short term as people “came to Christ.” Yet, over time a large proportion didn’t “stick.” This actually why evangelism in today’s world has far greater potential.

    In today’s world, the fact that we can no longer rely on techniques and “quick-strike” techniques is actually a good thing. It’s a hard thing. It’s a very hard thing. It’s still a good thing. In today’s culture, relationship is the single biggest “technique”. If we are honest with ourselves, we can look back even at the evangelism techniques and recognize that when it “stuck” a relationship was involved.

    Our two verses from Proverbs address speaking with others. Contrary to Proverb 15:1, the church (generally) has been characterized (with reason) as speaking with harsh words. In our worthwhile attempt to guide/direct people to live a God-honoring life, we instead scarred and hurt them with our words. Proverbs 25:15 shows us that gentleness will win for more people over, and if our goal is to win people over to Christ, then we should follow the wisdom of Proverbs. Here is the struggle point, however, with this wisdom; there is no guarantee and it will take time. In a quick-fix world like ours, the dedication of time becomes a stumbling block to Christians living out their mission.

    Gentleness and guiding are part of the image that Isaiah is trying to portray. Isaiah shows God’s heart for people. Who are we to not follow this guidance? Carrying lambs and guiding those nursing is not quick. It requires patience and love. This guidance and care is placed in the middle of verses talking about God’s glory and power. This tells us that power and glory go hand-in-hand with guidance and care. Of course, there is a human tendency towards condescension, of which we must all be cautious.

    This view of God is then applied to Jesus by Matthew (who was quoting Isaiah). It carries on the view of God above. There is the preceding story of a “sinful” healing on the Sabbath. Where was the gentleness and guidance in this? There was only condemnation and condescension. The key for our thoughts on gentleness and guidance are really in Matthew 12:20. A bruised reed means the plant is already injured and hurting. One can easily break a bruised reed, rather than bandage and work to heal it. A smoldering wick means that the fire was blown out or the oil extinguished. One can more easily fully extinguish a smoldering wick rather than reigniting the flame or filling the lamp with oil.

    1) Due to many issues (both past and ongoing), evangelism needs to occur in the church, as much as outside of the church. Who is someone struggling with their faith or beliefs? Who can you stand next to and lift up?

    2) Many of the people that we meet outside of the church have been hurt by it. This can be by words or spoken actions taken. It can also be by stories told of the church. How can you work to build a bridge to those that have been hurt by us?

    3) When being confronted with a challenge to your views, especially your world view, how do you respond?

  • Back To The Dark

    2 Chronicles 24:17–22, Matthew 10:17–22, Acts 6:8–15, Acts 7:51–59 (read online ⧉)

    Yesterday was only Christmas and here we are back into the darkness of the world. How true to life that is. A baby is born and a family feels joy. In the midst of that joy, there are concerns about food, shelter, relationships. There can even be future concerns such as disease or college. While a new life begins, other lives continue. In some respects, it is dishonest to always talk about the baby, because everyone else is just as important. When we are talking about Jesus, things are a little different, but the reality is that Mary and Joseph still had their lives to deal with. For example, the whole reason they were in Bethlehem was to be registered. Once they were registered, the Roman government was going to tax them accordingly. Sounds great, doesn’t it? It does sound like real life. That doesn’t mean we have to enjoy the darkness, nor does it mean we have to accept it as inevitable. It is however reality.

    Joash had been a good king with a singularly great and God-honoring advisor, Chief Priest Jehoida. Despite Joash’s obedience and Jehoida’s piety, the followers of other gods jumped into an advisory role with Jehoida’s death. As with much of Scripture, we don’t have the entire story. There was likely family and politics in the midst of it. There was also some hopeful and blind optimism which lead to thinking that all would be well. It wasn’t. Who knows how quickly Judah fell back into apostasy: days, months, years. God sent prophets to guide the people (especially the king) back to the right road, but they all failed. That God sent Zechariah—who would have likely had a significant place in Joash’s life—as a prophet tells us how serious God was. Joash, for whatever reason, sealed his apostasy and the fate of Judah by stoning him at the temple of God. The act that was to be used upon those opposed to God was instead used by them against a man of God.

    Jesus knowing his future and knowing the past history of Judah wasn’t really predicting much. If Jesus’ disciples were faithful, they would be persecuted. When Jesus talks about the fracturing of the family perhaps he had in mind Jehoida, Joash, and Zechariah, who were (from our perspective) framily. At least, they should have been, and that is what the Scriptures guide us to concluding. The framily of king and prophet that should have been united, were divided and ultimately destroyed.

    Not too much later, Stephen was killed. As he was in his community, it is possible that some of those who stoned him had been Jewish friends or family. For what was he brought to trial? Performing signs and winning arguments. So, he was falsely accused of blasphemy. Why was he killed? Because he claimed to see Jesus sitting at the right hand of God. The right and wrong lines between Joash and Zechariah are much firmer and better defined than those between Stephen and his accusers. We know that the Jewish (especially at that time) understanding of what it meant to follow God was wrong. However, unlike Joash they were not advocating for a different God. It was an understanding of God that was the issue.

    This difference of understanding applies to us today. The Western church is going through a series of upheavals. Sadly, the world watches and laughs. These upheavals are necessary, though. The church needs to discover (in some cases) and rediscover (in other ones) what it means to be a Christian in a non-Christian world. Much of these upheavals will allow us to understand ourselves better. The reason this is critical for the church is that we will be returning to the times of persecution in the Western world. No, we are not quite there, but it will come. The church needs to be ready, and a lot of being ready will require the shedding of a lot of ancient weight. It also will probably require us to pick-up ancient ways long discarded. Lastly, it will require us to learn a new language with which to share the Gospel. The message doesn’t change, just the method and the language.

    1) Do you think Joseph and Mary were concerned the day after Jesus’ birth, or were they still enjoying the moment? Why?

    2) Today’s passages are actually historical church decision (i.e., the lectionary). Why do you think the observation of Stephen’s martyrdom follows Christmas Day?

    3) Family and framily squabbles and fights are usually the ones that hurt the most. Why is that? How does impact the Gospel?

  • Hope Together

    1 Chronicles 29:14–19, Psalm 31, Isaiah 2:1–5 (read online ⧉)

    It is pretty universal across humanity for people to question their value and their purpose. In the ancient world, the view of gods was often not particularly positive. Much of the activity was done to appease the wrathful gods and to “bribe” them enough to maybe get what was desired. The progressive understanding of the Israelites was that while God required sacrifice it was much more than that.

    David rarely seemed to view himself particularly highly (which have actually been a problem, at times). This gave David an interesting perspective insofar as he knew that while God had chosen him (and his family), he didn’t take it for granted. He was grateful and amazed. In addition, part of his history (and that of Israel) was one of constant strife with the nations around them, and often at the losing end.

    It was the non-losing end that remained the underlying story of the Israelites…hope. David understood that while Israel was often in trouble, often through its own misbehavior, with God’s selection of David and his family that there was indeed hope that the people would finally be unified. Through unification, perhaps the people of Israel would finally be strong enough to stand against the forces around them.

    Regardless, for David at least, it all relied on God. While David and his military might could protect the nation to some degree, it was only through God’s mighty hand and care that the nation, and its people, would thrive. In Psalm 31, David calls upon God’s faithful love. Foreshadowing a significant event in the death of his descendant, David wrote, “…into your hand I entrust my spirit.” Hope and trust in God are what allows us to continue forward in strength when we cannot see in the dark.

    Isaiah’s vision shows us that even then God was looking forward to everyone worshiping God with each other. This worship would cross national, ethnic, language, and cultural barriers. This hope, of a world united in worship of God, is what we have to share with those who don’t know God. Let us take the light of hope forward into our lives.
    1) Have you ever questioned your value or purpose? What do David’s words say to that?

    2) Why is entrusting yourself to God such an important perspective?

    3) There is more than just worship involved in Isaiah’s vision? What else is there?

    FD) What do you think David means by trusting his spirit to God?

  • Tuesday after the First Sunday of Advent

    Lamentations 3:16–18, Zechariah 8:18–23, Nahum 1:15 (read online ⧉)

    In the United States, peace is often perceived as having plenty. Peace, as many of the saints who walked before us learned, is not found in the plenty. It is found in the lacking. This does not mean that lacking, in and of itself, is a spiritual discipline. Not seeking more often is a spiritual discipline, however. In a country filled with plenty, there is far more than we seem to be able to acknowledge. Yes, there are those that have less than you…sometimes incredibly less than you. As many of us grew up hearing, “if you don’t eat this food, we’ll send it to…” This is an oversimplification, and (really) somewhat offensive. However, there are countries that will take the clothing that our charities (such as Goodwill and St. Vincent De Paul) won’t take because it is far better than what they have.

    This perspective becomes important when we do lose nice things when we realize that the prosperity we had is gone. The writer of Lamentations ties in this loss with peace. The writer also ties in their future and hope to this loss. The peace they lost, however, had more to do with the loss of a relationship, rather than food, clothing, wealth, or freedom.

    Often (again, as the saints that went before us learned), the first lacking that is the most useful is food. In Zechariah, we read that the fasts will become a time of joy, again. They had become an onerous task that served no value. Yet, here the place of fasting as a time of connection with God, and setting aside comfort for God’s will is restored. Imagine having people come to you because of the success of your fasting! It would not be because of your better figure (having lost weight), but it would be because of the peace you found when setting aside one of your most basic needs.

    This like all things becomes what it was intended to be when living in the presence of God. At the feet of peace’s herald, at the feet of God, celebration and joy. The ultimate enemy of peace—sin—is destroyed.

    1) Why do you think lacking helps us get closer to God?

    2) During the Christmas season, there are plenty of parties and food. Think of that in light of our passages and reading. Where does that lead you?

    3) We are often attracted to the success of others, and thus try to emulate their practices and disciplines. How can that be helpful? How can that be hurtful? How could it affect your relationship with God?