Devotion.al

Tag: united

  • 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 in this story was the one who had to trust and rely on God for the journey to be a , 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 -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 . In the story, too, was trusting God. In this case, it was Ruth (the Moabite ) 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 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 circles. This is certainly not exclusive of Evangelical Christianity, as there is a 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 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 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 , 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 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 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 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 and discernment, people still do it. We have to. We cannot survive being paranoid. However, during his statements, Jesus still advises people that there will be false messiahs and false prophets. Jesus advises that the will come with God the 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 . 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?

    : 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 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 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 . 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 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 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 and love. This guidance and care is placed in the middle of verses talking about God’s 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 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 . 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 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 of the world. How true to that is. A baby is born and a feels . 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 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 , 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) . At least, they should have been, and that is what the 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 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 . 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 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 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 .

    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 . Foreshadowing a significant event in the 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 when we cannot see in the dark.

    Isaiah’s shows us that even then God was looking forward to everyone worshiping God with each other. This 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 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 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 States, peace is often perceived as having plenty. Peace, as many of the 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 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 .

    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 , 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 for God’s will is restored. Imagine having people come to you because of the 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 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 of our passages and reading. Where does that lead you?

    3) We are often attracted to the success of , 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?

  • Different Not Defeated

    Obadiah 11–17, Joel 2:12–19, Luke 21:12–19 (read online ⧉)

    The problem with being a follower of Jesus is, well, being a follower of Jesus. First, it makes you different. There’s step one. Being different. We all want to fit in, but as a follower of Jesus Christ, we aren’t supposed to just “fit in” to the world. Sometimes that may mean we don’t fit into the church or even our . We don’t like that. It is uncomfortable.

    The next problem, or at least something that should be a problem, is that we aren’t liked for being followers of Christ. This doesn’t mean that we are to be unpleasant or cruel. We are to display holiness, which we ourselves struggle with and against. There will be trials and tribulations, or there should be. That has been one of the biggest pitfalls of being in the States. We have lost most of the tension that our has with the world. We have become comfortable with the world, especially as expressed in the United States. This is why we should embrace our growing discomfort in the current culture. We are beginning to rediscover the cost of being a . We certainly are not at the place where Christians are being targeted programmatically. While many of our beliefs are being challenged in the culture and government, we are still free to practice our faith without fear.

    What gets interesting is how much of the non- and anti-religious people are beginning to gloat with their apparent victories against the faith. History doesn’t support their victory laps. The faith was practiced behind closed doors for years and flourished. We are seeing it now in other countries. The greater the oppression, it seems, the greater the growth. Obadiah’s warning to the gloaters is that they ought to be careful in their gloating. They confused and training for destruction and defeat. Sadly, so do many Christians.

    We are called to be in a healthy state of continuing repentance. It’s not as if God doesn’t already know that we messed something up. God is God. A state of ongoing repentance means that we do not think too much of ourselves and too little of . This is how we keep ourselves from surrendering to defeat and allowing ourselves to embrace God’s discipline.

    The part that often confuses Christians and non-Christians alike is that if Jesus Christ is King, then why does all this bad stuff happen to anyone, let alone Christians? That is a great question, and if asked honestly, it is working through. That doesn’t mean we will have all the answers, nor does it mean we will have the right answers for everyone. We need to have the right answer to that question for ourselves. When we are confident in the and strength and of the King of Kings the power of our answers is not the facts they convey but the that is God.

    1) What do you think of the current culture compared to so-called church culture?

    2) Where do you see yourself not fitting into wider culture? Where do you see yourself not fitting into church culture? How does following Jesus affect either?

    3) What is your emotional response to apparent cultural victories over Christianity and even faith in general? What does that response tell you about yourself?

  • Building Myths

    Luke 17:20–37, Acts 7:44–60, Revelation 21:14–27 (read online ⧉)

    Throughout the Old Testament, there are memorial stones. The names of springs have tale-telling names. Altars were built…lots of altars. Places provide identity. The Promised Land (Israel) was one of identity. That particular land was powerful enough in its and history that there are still fights involving it among differing “tribes” and religions (and each’s myriad of sects).

    A place will often develop a mythos or multiple ones. Think of the United States. There is the American Exceptionalism mythos. There is the American Colonialism mythos. There is the American Slavery/Segregation mythos. There is the American Dream mythos. There are plenty more American mythoi that aren’t listed. Some are held as (or more) firmly than religious beliefs. Some are feared for what they might represent. Regardless, they all revolve around a place.

    Jesus made a radical statement regarding the . The Pharisees and many other Jewish groups were looking for something tangible, which mostly revolved around the restoration (in some form) of an independent (and probably wealthy, secure, and powerful) Jewish nation, with some sort of Davidic monarchy. Jesus basically told them that they are looking in the wrong place.

    Some scholars interpret this as Jesus stating he was the Kingdom come, while look at it more along the lines of the kingdom being withing the people. We Christians often this being the .

    Stephen, who was martyred, reminded those that were about to stone him that God does not truly live in buildings built by hands. The building, it seems, is more for us than God. The passage in Revelation says there will be no temple. Think of that. There will be no temple, no church, no chapel, no alter. It will not be needed.

    We need to be honest with ourselves. We may say things such as, “the church is its people,” or “the people are the church.” However, when it comes right down to it, we gravitate toward needing a place. That place could be a park, a house, a (gasp) bar, a school, a cafeteria. We think this as obvious, now, but it wasn’t that long ago (truly) that people opposed holding a church service in a school. When the house church movement was reignited in the US over a decade ago, “established” churches said that house church wasn’t real church.

    The next “you can’t have church there,” argument is here. It’s actually almost past now, though people still hold onto it. It’s not possible, it is said, to have church over the , for the internet isn’t “real”. Even die-hard netizens often use IRL (in real ), so it seems even for them there is a struggle. As virtual reality goes mainstream, the concept of the internet as a rectangular screen will disappear. So, what are we to do? How will we treat those who don’t sit in our pews, but with us from 1000 miles away? Are they not the church? They don’t have a connection with us? Even those who, for various reasons, have moved or are moving away, but this is still their church home? Does someone stop being your just because you only see them on Facebook, and haven’t seen them in years?

    1) When we talk about church and place, what are the important things to consider?

    2) What makes “place” more or less real to you? How do you deal with people who have a different idea of place?

    3) What makes a place (such as a church) more “real” than the internet which is a gathering of people at a whole bunch of places? Is that a “real” difference, or is it what we are used to?