Threads from Henry's Web

Tag: Christian Living

  • With All the Faults and Failings

    With All the Faults and Failings

    One of the things I find most interesting about the Bible is the way that its stories openly–one might even say brutally–cover the faults and failings of the main characters. Nobody manages to come off all that well in the story. Even Moses, author of the Torah, or perhaps receiver of it, is not presented as a perfect man, though his failings seem rather minor. I’m reasonably certain that I would have done massively worse in his situation!

    I was reminded of this aspect of Bible stories when I listened to the story of Jephthah while walking on my treadmill, and then listening to my pastor’s sermon on Sunday, which was taken from Matthew 1. The sermon was focused on the righteous actions of Joseph, but I couldn’t help looking over the genealogy as he spoke.

    We’re introduced to Jephthah as “a mighty warrior” but he was the son of a prostitute. Yet he’s presented as one of the people who saved Israel. In Judges 11:15-28 he gives quite a recitation of the history of Israel, and in verse 29, the spirit of the LORD comes up him. What struck me in reading the story, besides the always disturbing story of his daughter, is that he is otherwise presented as a solid leader in Israel.

    My mind links things in sometimes odd ways, and what struck me in this story was the mention that Jephthah’s mother was a prostitute. It’s sparse and bold, neither covered up nor overemphasized. It was not, as one can gather from the story itself, something that endeared Jephthah to the good and normal citizens of Israel.

    That, in turn, led me to the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1. It’s odd, considering the times, that there are four women mentioned here. Tamar, who seduced her father-in-law while acting as a prostitute (Genesis 38), Rahab, the prostitute from Jericho who saved her family’s lives by helping the Israelite spies escape, Ruth the Moabitess (Deuteronomy 23:3), who was quite clearly a chaste woman, but barred from becoming an Israelite by the law, and finally “the wife of Uriah the Hittite,” the victim of David’s lusts.

    It interested me to consider why the Bible emphasizes these people. And I do the authors of these stories as making these folks stand out. Further, they stand out in some of the most powerful stories in the Bible. Genesis 38 hardly seems a necessary part of the story of the patriarchs, yet it is woven in later.

    I think there’s a point to be made here. The Bible is not a story of spiritual superheroes with superior ancestors. The heroes of the Bible do not stem from noble stock, the sort of people from whom we expect great things. Jephthah had become an outlaw with good-for-nothing men gathered around him. Then he got a call and the spirit of the LORD came upon him.

    And here in Matthew we have a close tie to the stories of Hebrew scriptures in these little hints provided in the genealogy. Jesus is the son of David–such noble ancestry! But look! There are some moments in that story that other people might prefer to tell.

    All that stands between you and me and doing great things is that call and that spirit. Good-for-nothing isn’t really in God’s vocabulary. “Nothing” is waiting for God’s “something.”

    (Featured image generated by Jetpack AI.)

  • Psalm 119:1 – Living According to God’s Law

    Psalm 119:1 – Living According to God’s Law

    Introductory Note

    I’ve been meditating on Psalm 119 recently after a conversation with an author regarding a forthcoming book reminded me of it. I’m going to write a few short devotionals. I’m not sure how many I’ll write, but reading this Psalm does make me think.

    For any devotional on Psalm 119, please remember that I’m commenting on no more than a few verses at a time, and thus won’t cover all, or even a substantial number of related ideas. Also, please remember that this is poetry, not a theological essay, so even within the text of the Psalm, ideas are not completed in a systematic way.

    Psalm 119:1

    Blessed are those blameless in their living
    Who act according to God’s instructions.

    Now there’s a challenging verse. We all have ways of avoiding it. But I think it pursues us through all our escape routes.

    Our escape routes often start from something very good. That’s what makes them so tempting.

    1. As Christians, we look immediately to the grace of God, given through Jesus. This is a good thing. We realize that being blameless and having all our actions fall within the range of God’s instructions (Torah), is not something we’re going to accomplish, and we are driven to a gracious God who forgives. But we can use this to avoid the issue. “Because God is gracious, I can safely ignore this,” we think. We think the only reason God talks about good actions is to let us know we can’t make it. But the Psalmist, at least, is talking about doing, hoping to do, an mourning the failure to do.
    2. We can decide that a totally blameless life is, in fact what we’re going to do, on our own and in this life. This leads us astray in two ways. It can be horribly discouraging and end up in cynicism, inevitable failure, and self loathing. On the other hand, it can lead us to imagine ourselves successful even when we aren’t and an incredible spiritual pride that falsely assumes one is blameless.
    3. We can engage in trimming the text, so as to make “blameless” less daunting. We can’t reach the goal, so we move the goal closer, or we pretend the goal is closer. This can result in complacency and also to a trust in ourselves for our salvation. The problem with aiming low is that we generally manage to reach no higher than our aim.

    That’s my long way of getting to this: God has instructions that are worth our attention. Even in our limited ways of attempting to follow these instructions there is blessing, not just bringing us to Christ, as important as that is, but also simply as good ways to live.

    Torah, the word used here for “instruction” (your translation may read “law”), goes beyond giving us a list of rules. I’ll discuss the various rule/law/instruction words in Psalm 119 along with other verses. It also includes stories of heroes of the faith. They were blessed in following Gods law, but they were not generally “blameless.”

    One need go no further than the last version in this section. (Psalm 119 is divided into 22 sections of 8 verses each, in which each verse begins with the same letter of the Hebrew alphabet.) “I remember your edicts. Don’t abandon me completely!”

    The Torah referenced here is the story of how God never abandons, even those who do forget.


    Some Definitions of Law in Scripture

  • YouVersion Verse of the Year

    YouVersion Verse of the Year

    I received an email from YouVersion (I use their app occasionally) with their 2023 “verse of the year.” This is the verse that has been shared, bookmarked, and highlighted most often through their community.

    It is Isaiah 41:10 (note that my links go to BibleGateway):

    [D]o not fear, for I am with you;
        do not be afraid, for I am your God;
    I will strengthen you; I will help you;
        I will uphold you with my victorious right hand.

    Isaiah 41:10 (NRSV)

    I find this interesting as this is a verse that might be considered by some to be taken out of context. I don’t know if you’ve seen any examples, but there’s even a coffee cup that reads “I can do all things through a verse taken out of context.” This lampoons the frequent use of Philippians 4:13 as a promise that God will help you do anything, from winning in sports to success in your business, to successful family life, and beyond. More on this verse a few paragraphs down.

    In the case of Isaiah 41:10, the specific reference is to the return of the Jewish exiles from Babylon, who are promised strength for the return and rebuilding. Isaiah 40 and onward, especially through 55, deals with these circumstances and is tremendously encouraging. So if you’re using it as encouragement in trying to get through your work week, you might well be taking it out of context.

    If you take the Bible as a series of data points, this is fairly accurate. This is not, in its context, a promise for all times and places. You will still get tired. Bad things may happen to you, as they happened to Job and as they have happened to many of God’s servants through time.

    So maybe it shouldn’t be used in the way that it is, likely the very usage that got it “verse of the year” from YouVersion.

    I’d say, not so fast.

    First, let me note, that many of those same servants of God who have grown weary and suffered through history have been sustained by verses like this. We might ask ourselves why that is. I haven’t run into that many Christians who really believe a Christian will never get tired. I don’t. Yet I appreciate this verse. I appreciate it even more when I’m bone weary and wondering whether I can take the next step.

    Crazy man, eh? (Well, yes, I am crazy, but that’s not relevant!)

    I recall C. S. Lewis’s image in The Magician’s Nephew, which I will always see as book 6 in the series however much publishers change it!) of a “deep magic from before the dawn of time” that overrides the rules that are known generally. Similarly, there’s context, and then there’s context.

    If my intent is to answer the question, “What is Isaiah saying about God?” Then I’m going to answer in terms of the return from exile, and also note that the audience is Israel. On this basis, I could find ways to remove the majority of scripture from relevance to me today. God isn’t talking to me here. That promise doesn’t apply to me.

    Scholars, and those who aim to appear scholarly, tend to wander about the landscape of scripture, informing the poor mortals who have been getting comfort from various passages that they are wrong, and that the scripture doesn’t mean what they think it means.

    Very often, that is quite correct. Sometimes people can be dangerously wrong in what they’re getting from scripture.

    But the problem is this: As scholars pull up the markers people have used to guide their lives, what do they hand out instead? With what do they replace these markers that have guided Bible readers’ relationship with God for decades, centuries, even millennia?

    Oh, did I say the problem? There’s a second one. Are those who criticize sure they’re right when they say a passage does not apply?

    I think very often they’re wrong, and I think many non-scholarly Christians living day-by-day relatively ordinary Christian lives instinctively get it more right. This is based on both a deeper and a broader context.

    In the case of Isaiah 40, the exiles are promised strength. Now remember that these exiles were in no danger of thinking God was promising that no matter what happened, they would never get tired. They weren’t in danger of thinking that everything was going to be easy. No, they were headed out on a hard task, and they and their immediate ancestors had lived through the exile.

    What was important was that God was with them and was now rescuing them and would be with them through all that came. In the broadest (and I think deepest) context of scripture, this is the story of the God who saves, built on the original story of the Exodus from Egypt. What do you suppose those Israelites thought about the idea that those who worship God would never suffer harm? They had even experienced some of the plagues right along with the Egyptians! They wandered through the wilderness. That experience was reinforced by the exile and restoration and became a foundation for the ultimate core story of Christianity, the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

    As such, Christians should be very willing to take up the promises of these events just as they are taken up in the story of redemption. We serve a God who redeems. We serve a God who is with us through all our suffering, who is there when we are weary. We know these things happen to us. But we also know they happened to people in the past because we’ve read their stories (testimonies) and we know that God’s promises to them, always tempered by understanding the broad and deep context, and even the immediate literary context, do, in fact, apply to us.

    I recall when a relative ripped one such verse from my mother, surely with good scholarly intent to maintain the accuracy of biblical interpretation. She had a favorite verse, Isaiah 49:25:

    But thus says the Lord:
    Even the captives of the mighty will be taken,
        and the prey of the tyrant will be rescued,
    for I will contend with those who contend with you,
        and I will save your children.

    Isaiah 49:25 (NRSV)

    This relative pointed out to her the context, very much like the one in Isaiah 41, and part of the same sequence of materials (Isaiah 40-55 form a coherent block) did not involve making sure everyone’s children were saved, but simply that the children of those who had gone into exile would be saved and brought back to their land. She used this as encouragement about her children, which, he told her, was to use the passage out of context.

    In the immediate context, that’s absolutely true. But in the broader and deeper context, this becomes part of the underlying story of redemption and of God’s intention for God’s people in all times and places. Readers should be encouraged by this, not because it was somehow specifically directed at them, but because it formed a formidable piece of the foundation of the story of a saving God, one who was and is with us in trouble, one who knows the pain, and yet one who takes us through to triumph.

    I had an opportunity to discuss this with my mother many years ago, and when I had given my explanation, she simply said, “Then I’m taking my verse back!” And she did!

    Philippians 4:13 can be used in many questionable ways, but it is not questionable to think that God will help you get through whatever situation you’re in. Many point out how this is about being able to carry out one’s mission despite hardships. And it is precisely that. But as a Christian, your life should be mission. I don’t think God is promising you that you’ll win all your games. Bluntly, most people, even those I’ve heard mocked about taking this out of context, don’t think it means that either.

    But if you’re reading it that God is with you as you carry out whatever call God has put on your life, if you believe from this that God will be with you and strengthen you for God’s own purposes, then I think you’re reading the verse in the deeper context.

    I want to end with one warning. Seeing this deeper context can help us connect with God through the story of scripture. We learn about relationship to God through reading about those who have been in such relationships over the centuries and millennia. When we read such a passage as giving us permission and power to carry out our own will wherever and whenever we want, we’re missing both the immediate context of scripture and also the broader and deeper context.

    Suggestion: When you want to apply one of these promises, read the immediate context. Then ask yourself how those who first heard it might have experienced it. Try to join the story as you see it in their lives and find your courage there.

  • After Teaching on the Sermon on the Mount

    After Teaching on the Sermon on the Mount

    My Sunday School class just finished a several-week study on the Sermon on the Mount. We did not use any study guides as a class, though I consulted three books I publish, One World: The Lord’s Prayer from a Process Perspective, The Jesus Manifesto: A Participatory Study Guide to the Sermon on the Mount, and Ultimate Allegiance: The Subversive Nature of the Lord’s Prayer. Some class members did make use of those references, and I also provided links to and some printed copies of John Wesley’s sermons on this topic. Class members also used a variety of Bible translations and other reference works.

    At the end of the class, one of the members commented that he was very glad to have studied the entire sermon, because he could see how it fit together and how the various parts built on others. He commented that we often read the Beatitudes and the Lord’s Prayer, while not continuing to cover the rest of the three chapters.

    Over the years I have read and studied this sermon many times, and I never fail to find something new with each adventure in it. There are three (well, maybe four) general approaches to it.

    First, let me dismiss my “maybe four.” I had one young man come to my house to try to get me saved. That I already professed Christianity was not important to him. I needed to understand it the way he did. One of the things he wanted me to understand was salvation by faith, which in his view eliminated anything having to do with works. He specifically told me that the Sermon on the Mount does not apply to Christians. I found it interesting that the longest collection of the teachings of Jesus we have was regarded as not applicable.

    Dismissing dismissal, I have found three general approaches, with the first two covering most and the third as a sort of supplement based on sermons I’ve heard.

    1. The sermon is a description of righteousness, designed to let us know we can’t attain it, and drive us to the cross.
    2. The sermon contains the central ethical teachings of Jesus which we are expected to follow.
    3. The sermon is descriptive of ways in which our behavior impacts others and our own social environment, and provides a guide to more effective functioning of society.

    I’ve intentionally made these as distinctive as possible. One of the things that struck me as I studied this time was that the sermon truly can function in all three ways. You might expect a Reformed theologian to embrace something like #1. Wesleyans might tend more toward #2. I’ve only heard a few people who go purely one way or another, though they often sound like they do! The third option is more often exhibited in preaching broadly based on the sermon when the speaker is trying to make applications in the social gospel.

    It struck me this time through that all three elements are present. There are repeated indications that the expectations expressed are well beyond our ordinary capabilities. Loving your enemies is well beyond most of us, though I’ve heard people cut the command down to size to make it possible. Consider, however, that Jesus’ own demonstration of this command involved requesting that the Father forgive those who were in the process of crucifying him.

    In the class we all commented on how potentially frightening it was to sincerely pray, “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Do you really want to be forgiven as you forgive? Perhaps you are a paragon on virtue in the matter of forgiveness, but I suspect not many of us are.

    Then there is the simple matter of most of chapter five, which sees all these things as expressions of what’s in the heart. I shocked some in the class by explaining that I had been a murderer during the prior week. I had been on the phone with a customer “service” rep who whose ignorance was exceeded only by his arrogance. (Can you perceive me despising him even now?) I told them that if I’d been physically with him, I’d likely have strangled him. Jesus isn’t giving me points for not being able to carry this out.

    Thus I think that the Sermon on the Mount very much calls us to realize that we are quite imperfect, and also directs us to an unattainable standard. That’s where grace comes in, and grace is reflected in some of those very passages on forgiveness. God is more forgiving than we are.

    At the same time, there is a great deal of value in the second way of looking at this. However unattainable the standard is, it is a good one. That is, it tells us about things that are good to do. The problem with perfection is that you fail to attain it, and end up apathetic. I can’t do what I’m supposed to, so why do anything? Perfectionism has created a large number of failures.

    The problem is that each time you lower the standard, you end up aiming lower. If you’re headed north following the north star you know you’re unlikely to get to that north star, or even the north pole. But if you decide that unattainability makes it unimportant, you’re likely to get nowhere. That’s where keeping a high standard and incredible grace together does well.

    I can’t resist quoting one of my favorite scriptures: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you both to will and to do his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:12-13). We often hear that preached by halves. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” from someone who was only vaguely aware of the next verse, if at all. Similarly, we can say, “It’s God, so don’t bother to do anything.” Neither of these is effective.

    And that leads to the third point. I wouldn’t use the third option alone, but in many cases this sermon shows us how society works. “Forgive and you will be forgiven,” speaks of God’s forgiveness, but also points to a way of life. The one who is unforgiving builds an atmosphere of unforgiveness. “Judge not, lest you be judged,” is also a very good principle in society. The verse, Matthew 7:1, is one of the more abused passages in scripture with some destroying it by overapplication and others essentially dismissing it by referencing exceptions.

    Jesus himself provides some clarification in Matthew 7:15-20. Thus we wind up with those who avoid 7:1 by calling every judgment “fruit inspection” and those who eliminate fruit inspection by calling it all judgment. Both passages are right there and both apply. There’s some wisdom needed, and doubtless we will not attain perfection!

    I enjoyed reading these passages and looking for the variety of applications. I’m grateful for grace in all circumstances. I’m grateful for a standard, which tells me that God’s glorious purpose is greater than I can imagine. Finally, I’m grateful for wisdom in looking at how we can better live with one another.

    It’s an error to treat everything as an answer to the question of whether one is going to heaven. Some things are about a better life here as well.

  • A Challenge to See

    A Challenge to See

    This past Sunday I was invited to preach in my home church, Chumuckla Community Church. It’s a real privilege to speak on the last Sunday of the year, hopefully rounding up where we have been and presenting a challenge for the future.

    I was offered the epiphany scriptures, and used Matthew 2:1-12. I’m not going to summarize the sermon. My message was simple: We need to learn to see Jesus in people and respond accordingly. I contrasted the “god made manifest” of an Antiochus Ephiphanes, as opposed to the baby in Bethlehem. Where is it that you see Jesus?

    Even further, how to you pursue the mission of Jesus? Is it according to the power-seeking ways of human politics, or is it in the giving ways of the Bethlehem story? Do you see God working when the powerful make power plays, or when servants serve?

    I referred to Matthew 25:31-46. There are many debates about this passage. Years ago I read it as a performance based righteousness, and as identifying the specific type of righteous performance required. (I still think it identifies righteousness for a follower of Jesus.) I later realized that nobody who thought they were going to heaven actually were doing so, and those who were, didn’t realize it. (I understand the varying views of just what is involved in this judgment. I’m not concerned with that difference at the moment. The good guys don’t realize they’re good; the bad guys think they’re good.)

    In the last couple of weeks, however, I became aware of a tragedy in the story. I’m not in any way presenting this as an interpretation of the parable. The blessing of a story, however, is that it can convey many things. The tragedy I see is that nobody at all was aware of the fact that they were seeing Jesus as they looked into the faces of people they either helped or didn’t. Not one recognized what they were seeing. This isn’t a question of salvation, but rather of the joy of living this life.

    We can argue that we should help the homeless, as an example, on the basis that we ought to do good things. We ought to help those less fortunate. Unfortunately, this can result in condescension. We look at the person as a way to punch our “good person” ticket. Or, perhaps, we perform whatever act we do out of a sense of duty. “It sure is annoying, but I suppose Jesus wants me to help this person.” This leads, for example (and I’m guilty!) to looking the other way when we don’t have cash, or don’t intend to give to a particular person.

    I’m not arguing that we need to give money to each and every person who asks. There is stewardship. There is the need to actually help. But what we do need to do is treat every person first as a human being, as one Jesus came to save, as bearing God’s image, and as a way in which we can see the face of Jesus. Hopefully, the other person will have the opportunity to see Jesus in us at the same time.

    This is not a New Year’s resolution. I expect to fail at it many times. But my challenge to myself, and to you, is to see Jesus much more frequently, and not turn away from the faces in which he is trying to show himself to me.

    And yes, you may see Jesus in the face of someone in need, someone that society might consider less than you. But you also might see Jesus in the face of one of the world’s elites. They also have a need to be treated as people.

    As I asked the congregation of Chumuckla Community Church: Did you see Him? Will you?

  • Wanting to Be Right Theologically

    Wanting to Be Right Theologically

    I work on a heavy schedule, and as someone who is self-employed, with two distinct lines of business, I very rarely see a blank to-do list. In fact, now that I think about it, it has been several years since I finished a day and could say I was done.

    I identify a couple of goals here. First, I’d like to be done at some point. “Now I can go on vacation,” I would say, “because everything is done.” Second, I want to get as much done as possible, not to mention a few impossible things. In reality, I’m not going to be satisfied on either of those points.

    Quoth Paul, “Oh wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me?”

    You may think I’m being irreverent to use that quote, in which Paul is referring to his own inability to do what he knows is right and wants to do, but I think it’s closer to the mark than most suspect. So let me first illustrate what I’m talking about with my work, and then get back to the spiritual lesson.

    No, that’s not quite right. Getting done with my work is physical, mental, and spiritual process. One of our problems is that we spiritualize spirituality until it has nothing to do with daily life. Ideally (another interesting word), we’ll see the physical and the spiritual working together. Everything from doing the dishes to writing a book to running a marathon (as my friend Dave Black is about to do) is both physical and spiritual; above all, real.

    Thus I start with the illustration of how I can attack my day. There are two extremes I can take. The first is my natural inclination. That is, I get up in the morning, come to this computer (most of my work resides in its chips), and start attacking my list. I’m not really a list person, but reality has forced lists on me. If I find myself failing to accomplish the list, I add hours at the end of the work day, all the while wishing I could add hours to the physical day.  This process is direct, measurable in effort and results, and easy to understand. More work = more accomplishment.

    Before I go to the next option, let me tell you about the problem I have with leaving the first. Mary Heaton Vorse (I believe she originated the saying) said that writing was the art of applying the seat of the pants to the seat of the chair. She was absolutely right. The arts of editing, designing, and marketing are much the same. So if chair meets backside for more hours, more will get written. Authors (and editors, designers, marketers, and perhaps all humans) have many excuses for not having seat meet seat, one of the most common being that you can’t force creativity. Editors, who like to disembowel the excuses of authors, like to point out that you’re not being all that creative outside of the chair either. Writing great novels in your imagination is perhaps not all that likely to bring either fame or fortune!

    So having written one or two books myself, and having published around 170 by other authors, I have a strong tendency to stick with Mary Heaton Vorse.

    Not so fast!

    I also know that creativity will demand its pound of my flesh. One of my techniques for planning out a cover or the chapter headers for the interior of a book is to put them on a computer screen I’m not using and walk by them every so often. This is a way of forcing me to become so disillusioned with the current state of the object that I will come up with a new look just to preserve my sanity. Put less bluntly, I look at it, think about it, and suddenly come up with an idea. Then I apply back side to chair and implement, generally followed by more looking.

    Now we turn to the second approach to my day. In this approach I ask what makes me productive. I could list a number of things, such as getting enough sleep. Staying up late to finish a project can get it out the door on schedule, while actually making me further behind overall. I am less efficient on insufficient sleep. Failing to spend time in daily devotions makes me less efficient. It’s easy—almost irresistibly easy—to decide that I’m too busy for that devotional time and simply jump into work. In fact, as I write, I must confess that this morning other than prayer time before I got out of bed, I am writing without devotional time. But this blog post struck me as I prayed (no, I’m not telling you this is God’s word; it’s just my musings), and here I am, drawn to the keyboard and the chair.

    Walking is also important for my efficiency. If I don’t get active, I’ll find myself accomplishing little. Walking can be done at any time of the day, and therein lies another problem. Can I stop working and take a walk? Can I stop working inside and go out and clean up branches in the yard? The second is easier than the first. Why? Because it feels like I’m working toward a goal. What is walking but time when the seat of my pants does not connect with the seat of my chair and thus is wasted? At least cleaning the yard produces stacks of broken branches and piles of leaves!

    But, and this is a serious “but,” thus gaining the initial point in this paragraph. But, I say, this impression is an illusion. Yes, I need to work. I need to accomplish things, but I also need to do things that keep me functional. There is a balance here that is not helped by my tendency to think in extremes. If I could just work 16 hours straight, the book would be done, I think. But that doesn’t work. There is a balance, a place where things work best.

    But, another serious “but,” I want to be able to say how hard I work. If I rest, in order to be more efficient, I can’t say I worked 16 hours, thus impressing other people with my diligence and dedication. Saying that I ordered my day to preserve mental, physical, and spiritual health, and thus actually accomplished more work than I would have if I had gone with Plan A just doesn’t have the same ring. Deep inside me is this little voice telling me that approach sounds lazy. Somewhere in there is another voice that tells me it is lazy. The voice that tells me it’s lazy lies like a rug. The one that tells me others will think it’s lazy is just irrelevant.

    I’m so programmed for work that I tend to listen to those voices anyhow. “Oh wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me?”

    Can you perhaps see some of our problems with spiritual things? In our minds there is a God out there demanding this ultimate perfection, incredibly wonderful holiness, and the attainment of unreasonable standards. We’ve even made a theology of it. We’re so desperately wicked and God is so holy that we are without hope. Jesus comes in and makes up the difference. That’s fine, except that we don’t really buy it. So we come up with new ways to try to attain “rightness” with God.

    Way, way back in the ancient days, it was by offering enough of the right sacrifices. Then we weren’t sure, so we offered more, all the while letting actual righteousness get lost in the scramble to offer the right sacrifices. Then we got hold of Jesus, so to speak, but since we couldn’t really believe that things were taken care of, we had lists of works. We’d try to make sure we got the lists done, and we were afraid that if we didn’t quite manage that, we’d be lost. (This isn’t a critique of Catholic theology, but of human existence. I don’t think the change of theology does nearly as much as people hope.)

    Come the reformation, we renewed the idea that God had taken care of it. We ended all the sacrifices with Jesus and now the reformation wanted to end all that checklist work being righteous enough to get to heaven. But we really didn’t want to believe that either, so we came up with righteousness by correct theology.

    I personally think the demands of theological correctness are much greater and much more sinister than the demands of correct living. The farmer in the field or the construction worker laying bricks could hope to live with integrity and carry out acts of charity. But now we have details of theology that must be learned but that many people don’t really get. There are those who demand, however, that they be understood. I was told once that if I didn’t realize that Christ had died for my sins and that I was thus “once saved, always saved” irrespective of any future event, I was not in fact saved at all. In this man’s view, my understanding of the theology was critical to my salvation. I might be incapable of doing one righteous thing (he made sure to quote scripture on that), but I must be capable of righteously (and rightly) understanding his view of the atonement, else Christ died in vain.

    We replaced the vanity of gaining righteousness by performing the right ritual with the vanity of performing the right set of deeds. Then we replaced the vanity of the deeds with the vanity of our understanding. All the while our lives continued to do very little to reflect righteousness by any standard.

    “Oh wretched people that we are! Who will deliver us?”

    Jesus, I think, if we’ll listen. Matthew 5:48 says to be perfect, but Matthew 7:1 says not to judge. Interesting that we try to apply that to others (while missing “by their fruit” a few verses forward), but not necessarily to ourselves. Earning the favor of God by doing things that are, really, the best things for ourselves and doing them perfectly is, of course, impossible. We can’t attain this. We might as well hope to reach the pole star by walking north!

    But here comes grace, ready to take that burden from you. To quote Paul again, “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” It’s the realization that you don’t have to reach the pole star, but you can walk north. You can go ahead and have times of rest in your spiritual life. Why? Because you live in grace. You can work on your own sanctification. Why? Because God has given you the space.

    If you spent your time trying to attain the pole star, you would have serious problems getting over the next hill. In an article titled North Star Closer to Earth than Thought, I found the estimate that it’s only 323 light years to Polaris, the current pole star. I also found an estimate that it would take 225 million years to walk one light year at 20 miles per hour. (I think the writer has a problem with the concept “walk.”) But even at that clip, Google tells me that 225 million times 323 light years is seventy-two billion six hundred seventy-five million. Of course that is shortened from ninety-seven billion six hundred fifty million by the new measurements (323 light years to Polaris rather than 434)!

    That shortening is sort of like saying, “No, you don’t have to accomplish all these deeds, just make sure you get the right set of beliefs. Then it will take only a bit under 73 billion years longer than you’ll live instead of 97 billion. Rejoice! Sing Hallelujah!”

    We need to let grace free us from the need for judgment, and then we can seek God without the constant worry that our experience and understanding are inadequate. Of course they’re inadequate! But God …

    You were dead through the trespasses and sins in which you once lived, following the course of this world, following the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work among those who are disobedient. All of us once lived among them in the passions of our flesh, following the desires of flesh and senses, and we were by nature children of wrath, like everyone else. But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ[a]—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God— not the result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life. (Ephesians 2:1-10, emphasis mine)

    Perhaps we should give up the works and the judgment, especially self-judgment, and live.

  • Thankful for the Gift of Suffering for Jesus?

    Thankful for the Gift of Suffering for Jesus?

    Because you have been graciously given this on behalf of Christ:
    not only in Him to believe,
    but also for Him to suffer. (Philippians 1:29, excessively literally)

    I’ve been meditating on two texts as the new year begins, Philippians 1:27-30, and Ephesians 5:1-2. I’ve been kind of ignoring this suffering thing so far. But last night listening to music in worship at Freedom Church Pensacola, it suddenly struck me to think: Do we have any songs in which we actually praise or thank God for suffering? There may well be, but I don’t recall one off-hand.

    This is certainly not a criticism of the church I was in at the time I thought it. I don’t recall this sort of thing anywhere. We don’t talk about it in the way Paul does here. In fact, we don’t really want to acknowledge the reality of suffering. Often our singing, praying, preaching, and indeed our living presents the pretense that nothing ever can or will go wrong. Have you ever heard anyone say in church, when a testimony is called for, that they have had a horrible week and just don’t know how they can go on? No! That’s a sign that they’re crazy. The intelligent and sane ones pretend.

    I don’t think Paul is saying here that suffering is wonderful and good in itself. I think the privilege is that the suffering that will come—and despite our desires, it will—is not vain and of no worth, but rather it is suffering on  behalf of the kingdom. It’s not cheering that there is pain, but rather cheering from the pain that whatever happens is not in vain.

    This reminds me of the Battle Hymn of the Republic and the frequent change of the line “as He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free” to “as He died to make men holy, let us live to make men free.” (You can find more on this here.) Those who have served in the military know that dying may be necessary. It’s not what you live for, but many people have faced death for their nation. Many Christians have faced or are now facing death for their faith. It’s a reality, but just as we change the line in the song, we’d rather not talk about it. Certainly, we don’t want to sing about it.

    Conducting ourselves in a way that is worthy of the gospel (Philippians 1:27) may involve annoyance, discomfort, suffering, and even death. God’s gift is that we do it in, with, and through Jesus Christ.

     

  • In Defense of the Ordinary

    In Defense of the Ordinary

    In preparing for my Sunday School lesson tomorrow I read some very high sounding words about settling for less: pleasure rather than joy, vengeance rather than justice, sentiment rather than beauty, and so forth. The source was N. T. Wright, quoted in the introduction to the  Cokesbury Adult Bible Studies Uniform Series for the Summer of 2016.

    The idea is not bad. But it is an idea that is easily corruptible. A pursuit of right-doing is a good thing until it becomes perfectionism, judgmentalism, self-righteousness, disdain, or any of a number of other ways in which doing good can become obnoxious and destructive. A love of learning is wonderful as long as it drives one to learn more and make use of that learning. When it leads to a superior attitude or an inability to hear the wisdom that may come from one less learned, it’s not so great. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but so is ugliness, at least when “ugly” is defined as “not living up to my personal standards of beauty.”

    We often express shock at the disciples, who constantly asked who was greatest in the kingdom. Why didn’t they get it? But we do very much the same thing. Constantly. A pursuit of excellence can become a pursuit of “more-excellent-than-ness” and can also result in a narrowing of vision.

    Any work is a vocation
    From OpenClipart.org.

    I was talking to my mother at the end of May, just after she turned 98. She mentioned to me the “sacred four” professions. We had a song in Sabbath School (this was the Seventh-day Adventist Church), and it went, using my name, “Henry can be a missionary doctor, a missionary doctor, a missionary doctor….” Or it could be teacher, nurse (for the girls, of course), and minister (meaning pastor/evangelist, for the boys). Those were the “great” vocations to pursue.

    My mother said she added farmer, janitor, housewife, and so forth. I remember her doing that. She’ bring in tools for each trade, and we’d have a hoe or rake for the missionary farmer, broom for janitor, etc. These were considered ordinary professions, but could be vocations as well. Why talk to your child about being a farmer or a building custodian, or perhaps a garbage collector? Because each of those things is an important vocation, as are many, many more. The real question is whether the person doing them will do them to the best of their ability and be a witness while doing so.

    And that is the question for the “important” professions as well. A seminary professor can be a missionary, but so can every other person out there.

    But we want a comparison scale.

    Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not against pursuing excellence. That’s a good thing. What I’m against is creating these hierarchies as to who and what is the more important thing. Does your pursuit of your concept of beauty mean that you can’t appreciate something simple? Does your pursuit of better theology mean you can’t listen with appreciation to a Sunday School class taught by someone who worked in the fields all week? Does your desire to hear the perfectly-formed, homiletically brilliant sermon mean that you can’t listen to a speaker who wasn’t trained in those things but has a real-life walk with God to testify to?

    I would suggest that a healthy pursuit of excellence leaves one appreciating excellence wherever it is found, not just in one’s little corner. A pursuit of beauty leaves one appreciating beauty in a wide range of places, seeing more beauty than others because one has beauty in one’s eye.

    I like the sentiments from N. T. Wright I noted at the beginning. We do lose when we accept vengeance in place of justice. We need to pursue justice. We need to pursue those great things. But we also need to recognize greatness everywhere. The clerk who rings up your groceries and does it well is absolutely a great person.

     

     

  • On Dealing with Scandal

    I haven’t gotten anything written during the last week on this blog. This is not due to a hiatus in Bible study. There’s plenty to write, and I’ve been writing elsewhere, but I just haven’t gotten here with something specifically exegetical.

    In the meantime, I wrote a devotional from my wife’s list, titled Handling Scandal. It seems rather relevant both in the church and the nation right now.

  • Notes on Mark 9:30-42

    The following notes and references expand on the material I presented in today’s Bible Pacesetter podcast on this same passage, Discipleship the Hard Way. This includes my working translation (not to be mistaken for a polished and final one), some notes, and some additional quotations and references.

    Translation and Notes:

    Teaching about the Cross

    30When he had left there, he traveled through Galilee, but he didn’t want anyone to know.

    Note that the secrecy here gives a clue to the secrecy theme in Mark generally. Jesus is keeping control of the agenda.

    Barclay comments on the importance of teaching the disciples:

    “He [Jesus] had to leave behind him a band of persons on whom these propositions were written.” — Barclay on Mark 9:30-31

    As Barclay notes here, while Jesus didn’t leave us written words, he left us these disciples. This was the critical importance of his spending time with them and teaching them. They would be the human means–accompanied and aided by the Holy Spirit–of getting the word out to all of us.

    31For he was teaching his disciples and telling them that the Son of Man will be betrayed into the hands of people, and they will kill him, but when he has been killed, after three days he will rise again.

    There is good indication that the teaching took place over some period of time. Wuest goes so far as to suggest different groups of disciples, traveling separately so as to be more secretive, but I think that goes well beyond the implication of the text.

    Barclay notes:

    “The human mind has an amazing faculty for rejecting that which it does not wish to see.” — Mark 9:30-31

    Often a lack of understanding does not result from our inability to understand, but rather from our unwillingness to understand. We can even deceive ourselves into thinking we don’t understand when actually we do. Jesus will be able to tell the difference!

    32They didn’t understand what he was telling them, yet they were afraid to question him.

    Barclay suggests they simply didn’t understand the meaning of the upcoming resurrection, but I would suggest that with many other commentators that the problem was that the understood what Jesus said very well, but couldn’t integrate it with their view of the Messiah.

    John Wesley comments:

    Mar 9:32 – They understood not the word – They did not understand how to reconcile the death of our Saviour (nor consequently his resurrection, which supposed his death) with their notions of his temporal kingdom. — John Wesley, Commentary

    The following quote from the Interpreter’s Bible on Mark 9:32 (Exposition) is enlightening:

    Consider how reluctant multitudes in the modern world are to accept the Cross of Jesus as the supreme revelation of God. Other conceptions and idealizations fit so much better into our “onward and upward” thought forms. The serene teacher of Galilee, the persuasive expounder of wise and helpful axioms of living, even the Jesus of Palm Sunday, acclaimed and honored, is so much simpler, more attractive, more congenial to our culture, to our reliance on education, to our disparagement of extremes. Many prefer an intelligent, reasonable Jesus, an inspiring example, the counterpart of a broad-minded liberal, a leader of all good causes. They too find it hard to understand the saying about crucifixion and death. And because so many do not understand it, the Christian faith, instead of being conceived and presented to the world as God’s act of redemption, has dwindled down into another set of moral maxims, impotent to face and subdue the tragic evils of life and of history. When we think of the gospel in any such fashion as that, we make a detour around the Cross, and so miss the way. — IB exposition on Mark 9:32

    Who is the Greatest?

    33And they entered Capernaum, and while they were in the house he asked them, “What were you discussing on the way?”

    Hate it when this happens. You’ve been going along happily living your own life and ignoring what Jesus teaches, and suddenly he asks you what you’ve been up to!

    The Interpreter’s Bible notes:

    What a disconcerting question! How would we like to have it suddenly put to us? There is always danger of great embarrassment when Jesus joins the conversation and asks quietly, “What were you talking about?” — IB exposition on Mark 9:33

    34But they were silent for on the way they had been discussing who was greater among themselves.

    This is a complete contrast to what Jesus has been trying to teach them, and demonstrates the point of verse 32—they simply didn’t get it!

    35And he sat down and called the twelve and said to them, “If anyone wants to be first, let him be the last and servant of all.”

    Servant leadership—it’s something we talk about a lot, but it is very hard to practice. We are very much programmed as human beings to desire position and power. Sometimes servant leadership puts one in a position of power. When that happens it’s even harder to maintain the servant attitude.

    Barclay comments:

    “It is strange how a thing takes its proper place and acquires its true character when it is set in the eyes of Jesus.” — Barclay on Mark 9:32-35

    “If we took everything and set it in the sight of Jesus it would make all the difference in the world to life.” — Barclay on Mark 9:32-35 [these two sentences come a few lines apart in the same paragraph — HN]

    36And he took a little child, he put it right in the middle, took it in his arms, and told them, 37“Whoever receives one of these little children in my name receives me, and whoever receives me, doesn’t receive me, but the one who sent me.”

    Often even in service we want to serve the person who is most important. If we can just follow the biggest person in sight around, perhaps we’ll get somewhere. At least we can bask in some reflected brilliance. But Jesus asks us to serve people who are unimportant, who can’t reward us, and in many cases can’t even thank us. He’s asking us to make service the object of our efforts, and not the means.

    The One Who Doesn’t Follow With Us

    38John said to him, “Teacher, we saw a certain man casting out demons in your name and we hindered him, because he’s not following right along with us.”

    Notice how this man is carrying out the work of the kingdom. Throughout the gospel of Mark, the sign that the kingdom is advancing is that the demons resist and then flee. But since this man is not part of the “in” crowd, the disciples want him stopped. What’s special about them any more if just anyone can do it? But Jesus again emphasizes the fact that service is to be our object, and not a means to importance. The important thing was that the kingdom was advancing and people were being set free.

    John Wesley comments:

    Mar 9:38 – And John answered him – As if he had said, But ought we to receive those who follow not us? Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name – Probably this was one of John the Baptist’s disciples, who believed in Jesus, though he did not yet associate with our Lord’s disciples. And we forbad him, because he followeth not us – How often is the same temper found in us? How readily do we also lust to envy? But how does that spirit become a disciple, much more a minister of the benevolent Jesus! St. Paul had learnt a better temper, when he rejoiced that Christ was preached, even by those who were his personal enemies. But to confine religion to them that follow us, is a narrowness of spirit which we should avoid and abhor. — John Wesley, Commentary

    39But Jesus said, “Don’t hinder him. For there is nobody who will do a miracle in my name and will be able to speak evil of me right afterward. 40For whoever is not against us is for us.

    Note the contrast to the similar statement in Matthew 12:30 and Luke 11:23. Both have their appropriate viewpoint. In this case, pride caused the disciples opposition to this man.

    John Wesley notes:

    Mar 9:39 – Jesus said – Christ here gives us a lovely example of candour and moderation. He was willing to put the best construction on doubtful cases, and to treat as friends those who were not avowed enemies. Perhaps in this instance it was a means of conquering the remainder of prejudice, and perfecting what was wanting in the faith and obedience of these persons. Forbid him not – Neither directly nor indirectly discourage or hinder any man who brings sinners from the power of Satan to God, because he followeth not us, in opinions, modes of worship, or any thing else which does not affect the essence of religion.

    Mar 9:40 – For he that is not against you, is for you – Our Lord had formerly said, he that is not with me, is against me: thereby admonishing his hearers, that the war between him and Satan admitted of no neutrality, and that those who were indifferent to him now, would finally be treated as enemies. But here in another view, he uses a very different proverb; directing his followers to judge of men’s characters in the most candid manner; and charitably to hope that those who did not oppose his cause wished well to it. Upon the whole, we are to be rigorous in judging ourselves, and candid in judging each other.

    And Barclay, on the same passage:

    “It is necessary always to remember that truth is always bigger than any man’s grasp of it.” — Barclay on Mark 9:38-40

    41Whoever gives you a cup of water in the name because you are of Christ, I tell you he will definitely not lose his reward.”

    We don’t work for the reward, but God will reward.

    References

    These are some references I consulted:

    Commentaries

    Barclay, William. The Gospel of Mark (Daily Study Bible). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1956.

    Bock, Darrell L. Jesus According to Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002.

    Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993. Via Logos Bible Software.

    Wesley, John. John Wesley’s Commentary, from eSword.

    Wuest, Kenneth S. Mark in the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1950.

    Bibles:

    The New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV)
    The Learning Bible (CEV)
    The Oxford Study Bible (REB)
    UBS Greek New Testament, 4th Edition