For the life of me, I can't figure out why I didn't post a blog about Acts back in January. I know I read the book, the first in a Read Through the Bible in one year in alphabetical order plan. Maybe I wrote it but didn't save it; or something like that. This was to be a learning experience; maybe I hadn't yet learned something crucial to publishing.
So, here I am, December 29, writing what should have been the first blog post this year. And in full disclosure, I'm only skimming the book of Acts as I make these comments.
Acts is the sequel to Luke. (And, just FYI, my unpublished novel would be the prequel to Luke. There's more in my blog post in Luke.)
After the Gospels, Acts is probably the best page-turner in the New Testament. It's written as a narrative, with lots of events and dialog; unlike the epistles that follow.
I think it's sometimes called the "Acts of the Apostles," but I've heard people say it should be called the "Acts of the Holy Spirit." The story begins directly after Jesus' resurrection and just before His ascension. After that, it tells of how the apostles--aided by the Holy Spirit--carried the message of Jesus throughout the Roman Empire of the first century. The topic verse is Acts 1:8, "You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."
It's great reading. There are sections about the earliest church in Jerusalem, about Peter and John, about the scattering of the Twelve (or, actually, the Eleven), and so on. I love the Peter stories best. After coming across as immature and impetuous in the Gospels, Peter shows up in Acts as a convicted and courageous saint.
Another of my favorite stories is about Philip and the Ethiopian, at the end of chapter 8.
The bulk of Acts follows Paul on his journeys. I'm always fascinated by what they call the "we" passages, that seem to be a personal account, presumably by Luke himself.
Reading through Acts, you can get caught up in the narrative and the sequence of exciting events. It's best, though, to step back and consider the bigger picture of Acts. It's main point is that within the space of a few years, and through the work of a couple dozen disciples of Jesus--including Paul, who started as a persecutor of Christians--the Good New of Christ's salvation was carried throughout the Roman Empire, literally changing the world. By the power of the Holy Spirit.
And as I write the last of my blogs about the books of the Bible, this would have to be the conclusion. The whole Bible is a story of the Good News of God's love, justice, and salvation that has been carried through the ages and throughout the world by the power of the Holy Spirit. We are blessed to have God's Living Word to this day.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Zephaniah: The End. Sort of.
I've been Reading Through The Bible (RTTB) in one year, in alphabetical order. Zephaniah is, therefore, the Last Book. (Except, somehow I forgot to write a blog entry on Acts, so that will be my last one.)
Zephaniah was probably written during the reign of King Josiah, or sometime between 640 and 609 B.C. That's roughly the same time as Jeremiah, Habakkuk and Nahum. My Study Bible tells me the prophecy may have pre-dated the reforms of King Josiah. The northern kingdom, Israel, was already in exile; Judah would collapse in 586.
When I took the course on Old Testament Prophets at Dallas Seminary, one assignment was perhaps the most helpful project of my entire academic career. Dr. Stephen Bramer had us create a chart of all the prophets--with information about their date, the circumstances, the messages, etc. We were also supposed to come up with some sort of easy mnemonic device to help us remember a bit about the book. I remember using the word "zephyr" for Zephaniah. A zephyr is a kind of wind; the book of Zephaniah uses the theme of sweeping away (or perhaps blowing away) the land and its people.
God threatened to sweep away the the land and the people because of His wrath for their wickedness. Most of the prophecy details God's judgments against various groups--Judah, Philistia, Moab and Ammon, Cush, Assyria. The prophecies speak of the Day of the Lord, which was fulfilled in the near term through the assault of the Babylonians. Of course, we still anticipate the Great Day of the Lord.
Here are a couple of my favorite passages: "At that time I will search Jerusalem with lamps and punish those who are complacent, who are like wine left on its dregs, who think, 'The LORD will do nothing, either good or bad'" (Zeph. 1:12). Still today, there are far too many people who dismiss God, thinking He will refrain from punishing the wicked, or exercising His justice.
The end of the book of Zephaniah is a word of comfort and assurance for Judah. The LORD won't always be angry, and He will restore His beloved people. "The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, He will quiet you with His love, He will rejoice over you with singing" (Zeph. 3:17).
Imagine the LORD, the great God of the universe, rejoicing over us with singing.
Although that's not the final word in the book of Zephaniah, nor that final word in the Old Testament, it is a fitting final word for this Reading Through the Bible in alphabetical order.
Amen and amen.
Zephaniah was probably written during the reign of King Josiah, or sometime between 640 and 609 B.C. That's roughly the same time as Jeremiah, Habakkuk and Nahum. My Study Bible tells me the prophecy may have pre-dated the reforms of King Josiah. The northern kingdom, Israel, was already in exile; Judah would collapse in 586.
When I took the course on Old Testament Prophets at Dallas Seminary, one assignment was perhaps the most helpful project of my entire academic career. Dr. Stephen Bramer had us create a chart of all the prophets--with information about their date, the circumstances, the messages, etc. We were also supposed to come up with some sort of easy mnemonic device to help us remember a bit about the book. I remember using the word "zephyr" for Zephaniah. A zephyr is a kind of wind; the book of Zephaniah uses the theme of sweeping away (or perhaps blowing away) the land and its people.
God threatened to sweep away the the land and the people because of His wrath for their wickedness. Most of the prophecy details God's judgments against various groups--Judah, Philistia, Moab and Ammon, Cush, Assyria. The prophecies speak of the Day of the Lord, which was fulfilled in the near term through the assault of the Babylonians. Of course, we still anticipate the Great Day of the Lord.
Here are a couple of my favorite passages: "At that time I will search Jerusalem with lamps and punish those who are complacent, who are like wine left on its dregs, who think, 'The LORD will do nothing, either good or bad'" (Zeph. 1:12). Still today, there are far too many people who dismiss God, thinking He will refrain from punishing the wicked, or exercising His justice.
The end of the book of Zephaniah is a word of comfort and assurance for Judah. The LORD won't always be angry, and He will restore His beloved people. "The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, He will quiet you with His love, He will rejoice over you with singing" (Zeph. 3:17).
Imagine the LORD, the great God of the universe, rejoicing over us with singing.
Although that's not the final word in the book of Zephaniah, nor that final word in the Old Testament, it is a fitting final word for this Reading Through the Bible in alphabetical order.
Amen and amen.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Zechariah: We have heard this before
Zechariah is one of the newest books in the Old Testament, or one of the latest, if you want to put it that way. It is a post-Exilic work. It goes hand in hand with Haggai, exhorting the Jews who'd returned to Jerusalem from captivity in Babylon to get going on restoring Jerusalem's temple, walls, and religion.
A professor at DTS often said that to understand the New Testament, you have to understand the Old Testament. You might even refine that to, "If you have even a prayer of understanding Revelation, you'd better be familiar with the OT, particularly Zechariah."
There are all kinds of literary motifs, images, or allusions in Zechariah that pop up again in Revelation. For example, those horses of the apocalypse are seen in Zech. 1:7-8 and again in 6:1-8. The thing about the horns? See Zech 1:18-21.
As always, when I read these passages about the Day of the Lord, I tremble, because I think it may indeed be imminent. I get really creeped out when something is weirdly specific. For example, I had just heard a story on NPR describing the effects of mustard gas--which are suspected to be in the hands of Bashar al-Assad, president of Syria, and which he is supposedly on the brink of deploying. The story said that mustard gas is a blistering agent. It is lethal because it gets in the lungs and destroys the delicate (and vital!) tissue. Zechariah 14:12 reads, "This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. On that day, men will be stricken by the LORD with great panic."
My two favorite passages in Zechariah are 4:6, "So he said to me, 'This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: "Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit," says the LORD Almighty.'"
And Zechariah 7:8-10: "And the word of the LORD came again to Zechariah: 'This is what the LORD Almighty says: "Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. In your hearts do not think evil of each other.'"
It is amazing to me how these passages about godly living repeat over and over throughout the Old Testament.
And, as it continues in Zechariah 7:11-12: "But they refused to pay attention; stubbornly they turned their backs and stopped up their ears. They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen to the law or to the words that the LORD Almighty had sent by his Spirit through the earlier prophets. so the LORD Almighty was very angry."
It gets worse. And here again, O my people, take heed: "'When I called, they did not listen; so when they called, I would not listen,' says the LORD Almighty" (Zechariah 7:13).
A professor at DTS often said that to understand the New Testament, you have to understand the Old Testament. You might even refine that to, "If you have even a prayer of understanding Revelation, you'd better be familiar with the OT, particularly Zechariah."
There are all kinds of literary motifs, images, or allusions in Zechariah that pop up again in Revelation. For example, those horses of the apocalypse are seen in Zech. 1:7-8 and again in 6:1-8. The thing about the horns? See Zech 1:18-21.
As always, when I read these passages about the Day of the Lord, I tremble, because I think it may indeed be imminent. I get really creeped out when something is weirdly specific. For example, I had just heard a story on NPR describing the effects of mustard gas--which are suspected to be in the hands of Bashar al-Assad, president of Syria, and which he is supposedly on the brink of deploying. The story said that mustard gas is a blistering agent. It is lethal because it gets in the lungs and destroys the delicate (and vital!) tissue. Zechariah 14:12 reads, "This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. On that day, men will be stricken by the LORD with great panic."
My two favorite passages in Zechariah are 4:6, "So he said to me, 'This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: "Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit," says the LORD Almighty.'"
And Zechariah 7:8-10: "And the word of the LORD came again to Zechariah: 'This is what the LORD Almighty says: "Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. In your hearts do not think evil of each other.'"
It is amazing to me how these passages about godly living repeat over and over throughout the Old Testament.
And, as it continues in Zechariah 7:11-12: "But they refused to pay attention; stubbornly they turned their backs and stopped up their ears. They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen to the law or to the words that the LORD Almighty had sent by his Spirit through the earlier prophets. so the LORD Almighty was very angry."
It gets worse. And here again, O my people, take heed: "'When I called, they did not listen; so when they called, I would not listen,' says the LORD Almighty" (Zechariah 7:13).
Friday, December 14, 2012
Titus: Paul insults the islanders
Titus is another of those short letters from Paul to a protege. This time, it's sent to Titus, who was dispatched to Crete to care for the flock there.
It's a nice letter, although it's not (IMHO) all that memorable. I think I've heard some church-speak phrase about Titus 2 discipling for women. That would be following Paul's instruction to get older women to instruct younger women "to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind and to be subject to their husbands so that no one will malign the word of God" (Titus 2:4-5).
On reading Titus this time, I had to chuckle at chapter one, where Paul gives his thoughts about Titus' flock, the Cretans. First, he tells Titus to appoint some elders to assist with the work, and gives some character traits to demand among those worthies.
Apparently, though, Paul had no high regard for these people. He has very harsh words in 1:10-16. Here's my favorite part: "Even one of their own prophets has said, 'Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.' This testimony is true." (1:12-13.) He winds up the passage with, "They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good" (1:16). In fairness, Paul probably was thinking of a small group of bad apples. But still...
By the way, Cretans are inhabitants of the island of Crete. They should not be confused with cretins, unfortunate individuals who suffer cretinism. Cretinism is a condition of severely stunted physical and mental growth due to untreated congenital deficiency of thyroid hormones (congenital hypothyroidism) usually due to maternal hypothyroidism. (Thanks,Wikipedia).
And of course, "cretin" is a slang, pejorative term for a moron. No doubt Paul would have loved the play on words.
I guess the "theological" take on the harsh words Paul inflicts would be that Christians need to be wary, discerning and, evidently, blunt with people who willingly and aggressively pervert the word of God.
It's a nice letter, although it's not (IMHO) all that memorable. I think I've heard some church-speak phrase about Titus 2 discipling for women. That would be following Paul's instruction to get older women to instruct younger women "to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind and to be subject to their husbands so that no one will malign the word of God" (Titus 2:4-5).
On reading Titus this time, I had to chuckle at chapter one, where Paul gives his thoughts about Titus' flock, the Cretans. First, he tells Titus to appoint some elders to assist with the work, and gives some character traits to demand among those worthies.
Apparently, though, Paul had no high regard for these people. He has very harsh words in 1:10-16. Here's my favorite part: "Even one of their own prophets has said, 'Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.' This testimony is true." (1:12-13.) He winds up the passage with, "They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good" (1:16). In fairness, Paul probably was thinking of a small group of bad apples. But still...
By the way, Cretans are inhabitants of the island of Crete. They should not be confused with cretins, unfortunate individuals who suffer cretinism. Cretinism is a condition of severely stunted physical and mental growth due to untreated congenital deficiency of thyroid hormones (congenital hypothyroidism) usually due to maternal hypothyroidism. (Thanks,Wikipedia).
And of course, "cretin" is a slang, pejorative term for a moron. No doubt Paul would have loved the play on words.
I guess the "theological" take on the harsh words Paul inflicts would be that Christians need to be wary, discerning and, evidently, blunt with people who willingly and aggressively pervert the word of God.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Song of Songs: For mature audiences only
I've always had trouble with Song of Songs, or "Song of Solomon," as we used to call it. This time, I decided to listen to the audio version (see my comments from Psalms). That was another great call.
Have you ever noticed that preachers don't use Song of Songs for regular sermon series? Have you ever studied it in a Sunday morning Bible study, other than a cursory look? Have you ever heard a 14-year-old ask questions about what he gathered from a study on Song of Songs?
There's a reason these answers are probably all "No." Song of Songs has some, shall we say, "graphic" language in it. So do Hosea, Ezekiel, and other books, but this is different.
Reading Song of Songs makes me feel kind of uncomfortable and I know I'm not the only one. If I'm not mistaken, not every church father wanted to include it in the Old Testament canon. Over the ages, scholars tried to make the text a little more palatable by explaining it in different ways. I wrote a paper once about five different views on how to interpret the text.
Through the middle ages, everyone just assumed that it was an allegory, representing the love of Christ for His bride, the Church. Some think it was just part of the collection of writings of Solomon, and somewhat autobiographical. Some think it was poetry for weddings. Another thought is that it was intended to be a drama, loosely linking songs with a story line--not unlike Handel's Messiah or Cats by Andrew Lloyd-Weber. There are other theories, too complicated or arcane to note in this blog.
After listening to the spoken word, the "meaning" of the text was pretty clear. Max McLean, the reader, without being overly dramatic, brings out the fundamental eroticism of Song of Songs. It is definitely a poem about lusty lovers, although exactly what their circumstances are is difficult to determine. Maybe the best way to view it is as a memorable and instructive portrait of true love as God intended it. It addresses the delights and sanctity of erotic love between marriage partners and it also offers pictures of the passionate, all-consuming love of God for his people. (At least, that's what I concluded in my paper.)
One still has to wonder how it ended up in the canon. And I still don't really want to study it with my Sunday school class of single adults. (Sorry, Kehilas. You're on your own.)
Have you ever noticed that preachers don't use Song of Songs for regular sermon series? Have you ever studied it in a Sunday morning Bible study, other than a cursory look? Have you ever heard a 14-year-old ask questions about what he gathered from a study on Song of Songs?
There's a reason these answers are probably all "No." Song of Songs has some, shall we say, "graphic" language in it. So do Hosea, Ezekiel, and other books, but this is different.
Reading Song of Songs makes me feel kind of uncomfortable and I know I'm not the only one. If I'm not mistaken, not every church father wanted to include it in the Old Testament canon. Over the ages, scholars tried to make the text a little more palatable by explaining it in different ways. I wrote a paper once about five different views on how to interpret the text.
Through the middle ages, everyone just assumed that it was an allegory, representing the love of Christ for His bride, the Church. Some think it was just part of the collection of writings of Solomon, and somewhat autobiographical. Some think it was poetry for weddings. Another thought is that it was intended to be a drama, loosely linking songs with a story line--not unlike Handel's Messiah or Cats by Andrew Lloyd-Weber. There are other theories, too complicated or arcane to note in this blog.
After listening to the spoken word, the "meaning" of the text was pretty clear. Max McLean, the reader, without being overly dramatic, brings out the fundamental eroticism of Song of Songs. It is definitely a poem about lusty lovers, although exactly what their circumstances are is difficult to determine. Maybe the best way to view it is as a memorable and instructive portrait of true love as God intended it. It addresses the delights and sanctity of erotic love between marriage partners and it also offers pictures of the passionate, all-consuming love of God for his people. (At least, that's what I concluded in my paper.)
One still has to wonder how it ended up in the canon. And I still don't really want to study it with my Sunday school class of single adults. (Sorry, Kehilas. You're on your own.)
Monday, December 3, 2012
1,2 Timothy: The private thoughts of Paul
The letters to Timothy may have ended up as messages to all Christians, but they were likely written as personal correspondence, Paul's private thoughts to his trusted protege.
First Timothy feels a bit jumbled, a little anguished. It sounds like my own prayers on my own overwrought days, when I'm worried about people and trying to comfort myself. Paul, too, was troubled by people he cared about, their bad decisions and bad behavior.
It occurred to me that the infamous passage in 2:9-15, where he speaks rather demeaningly about women, might have been caused by some particular annoying woman who was driving him crazy. I mean, really: who hasn't felt that way? It makes me wonder if "the Church" all these years didn't just snap up that passage and apply it wrongfully to all women at all times.
Interestingly, the next passage in chapter 3, has qualifications for church leaders. Most churches take it pretty seriously, but we just know there are a lot of men who have been accepted as leaders or deacons--even though they beat their wives or were given to drunkenness.
In 1 Timothy, Paul exhorts and counsels Timothy about dealing with his church congregation. Some of it (e.g., 6:20, or 4:1-5) seems to take aim at church members who are off the path of doctrine. As I read these passages, I got to thinking about what I call "The Tea Party Christians." (This doesn't apply to all who embrace the Tea Party, and it does apply to some who eschew the radical right-wing movement.) These are the people who are soooooooooo pious that they end up hateful. I'm especially thinking about people who, during the recent presidential election, were constantly equating their extreme right-wing views with Christianity. I found it offensive, to say the least. I just don't think Jesus would have done or said or behaved as they did.
The takeaway from 1 Timothy is that those "believers" are not much better in God's eyes that non-believers. I would add that it is difficult to discern right from wrong, and each of us needs to beg God for wisdom.
Second Timothy is one of the grimmest books in the New Testament. It was written at the end of Paul's life and his bleak imprisonment in Rome. He was old, lonely, probably sickly. You can feel the despair in his words, especially his frustration and disappointment with false teachers. These were people he knew and had perhaps mentored who were spreading weird religious ideas, probably to enrich themselves, and also taking advantage of "weak-willed women" (3:6). No wonder Paul told Timothy "Preach the Word" (4:2). (This is the motto for Dallas Theological Seminary. I have it on a T-shirt in Greek!)
But Dear God, may we all be able at the end of our lives to say as Paul said, "I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing: (4:7-8).
First Timothy feels a bit jumbled, a little anguished. It sounds like my own prayers on my own overwrought days, when I'm worried about people and trying to comfort myself. Paul, too, was troubled by people he cared about, their bad decisions and bad behavior.
It occurred to me that the infamous passage in 2:9-15, where he speaks rather demeaningly about women, might have been caused by some particular annoying woman who was driving him crazy. I mean, really: who hasn't felt that way? It makes me wonder if "the Church" all these years didn't just snap up that passage and apply it wrongfully to all women at all times.
Interestingly, the next passage in chapter 3, has qualifications for church leaders. Most churches take it pretty seriously, but we just know there are a lot of men who have been accepted as leaders or deacons--even though they beat their wives or were given to drunkenness.
In 1 Timothy, Paul exhorts and counsels Timothy about dealing with his church congregation. Some of it (e.g., 6:20, or 4:1-5) seems to take aim at church members who are off the path of doctrine. As I read these passages, I got to thinking about what I call "The Tea Party Christians." (This doesn't apply to all who embrace the Tea Party, and it does apply to some who eschew the radical right-wing movement.) These are the people who are soooooooooo pious that they end up hateful. I'm especially thinking about people who, during the recent presidential election, were constantly equating their extreme right-wing views with Christianity. I found it offensive, to say the least. I just don't think Jesus would have done or said or behaved as they did.
The takeaway from 1 Timothy is that those "believers" are not much better in God's eyes that non-believers. I would add that it is difficult to discern right from wrong, and each of us needs to beg God for wisdom.
Second Timothy is one of the grimmest books in the New Testament. It was written at the end of Paul's life and his bleak imprisonment in Rome. He was old, lonely, probably sickly. You can feel the despair in his words, especially his frustration and disappointment with false teachers. These were people he knew and had perhaps mentored who were spreading weird religious ideas, probably to enrich themselves, and also taking advantage of "weak-willed women" (3:6). No wonder Paul told Timothy "Preach the Word" (4:2). (This is the motto for Dallas Theological Seminary. I have it on a T-shirt in Greek!)
But Dear God, may we all be able at the end of our lives to say as Paul said, "I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing: (4:7-8).
1,2 Thessalonians: What I would say to my own flock
Paul was a great theologian and evangelist, but 1 and 2 Thessalonians reveal that he was probably a great pastor.
I spend quite a bit of my time "pastoring" or shepherding some people--my Sunday school class, and my Young Lives group of teen moms. Consequently, much of what I read in Thessalonians speaks to my feelings about my little flocks.
I read Thessalonians in early November, and was inspired to quote 1 Thess 1:2-3 on a Thanksgiving card to my co-workers in Young Lives: "We always thank God for all of you, mentioning you in our prayers. We continually remember before our God and Father your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ." How eloquent; how true.
The text in 1 Thess. 2:8 is a favorite within Young Life, a scriptural basis for that group's method of sharing Christ by sharing lives: "We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us." Also, verses 11-12: "For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into his kingdom and glory."
Or, I can say along with Paul, "For what is our hope, our joy, or the crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes? Is it not you? Indeed, you are our glory and joy." (2:19-20).
Paul encourages and admonishes his flock as I would my own: "May [the Lord] strengthen your hearts so that you will be blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus comes with all his holy ones" (3:13). "Be joyful always; pray continually; give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God's will for you in Jesus Christ" (5:16-18).
1 and 2 Thessalonians are also pretty well known for their passages on death and the eschaton, or end times. Those are never my favorite topics, even though Paul assures believers of a brilliant eternal future in the presence of Christ.
However, I do like 2 Thess. 1:8-9: "He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power." Legions of theologians would disagree, but I feel this underscores the view that hell--at least for garden-variety non-believers--is annihilation, as opposed to never-ending burning in the lake of fire (which perhaps is reserved for Satan and his cronies).
I guess I was a little surprised to find how much 1 and 2 Thessalonian resonate with me these days. Some of the sweet things Paul says to his people -- well, I couldn't say them better myself.
I spend quite a bit of my time "pastoring" or shepherding some people--my Sunday school class, and my Young Lives group of teen moms. Consequently, much of what I read in Thessalonians speaks to my feelings about my little flocks.
I read Thessalonians in early November, and was inspired to quote 1 Thess 1:2-3 on a Thanksgiving card to my co-workers in Young Lives: "We always thank God for all of you, mentioning you in our prayers. We continually remember before our God and Father your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ." How eloquent; how true.
The text in 1 Thess. 2:8 is a favorite within Young Life, a scriptural basis for that group's method of sharing Christ by sharing lives: "We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us." Also, verses 11-12: "For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into his kingdom and glory."
Or, I can say along with Paul, "For what is our hope, our joy, or the crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes? Is it not you? Indeed, you are our glory and joy." (2:19-20).
Paul encourages and admonishes his flock as I would my own: "May [the Lord] strengthen your hearts so that you will be blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus comes with all his holy ones" (3:13). "Be joyful always; pray continually; give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God's will for you in Jesus Christ" (5:16-18).
1 and 2 Thessalonians are also pretty well known for their passages on death and the eschaton, or end times. Those are never my favorite topics, even though Paul assures believers of a brilliant eternal future in the presence of Christ.
However, I do like 2 Thess. 1:8-9: "He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power." Legions of theologians would disagree, but I feel this underscores the view that hell--at least for garden-variety non-believers--is annihilation, as opposed to never-ending burning in the lake of fire (which perhaps is reserved for Satan and his cronies).
I guess I was a little surprised to find how much 1 and 2 Thessalonian resonate with me these days. Some of the sweet things Paul says to his people -- well, I couldn't say them better myself.
1,2 Samuel: Better than a movie
In 2012, our Sunday school class, The Kehila Class, studied 1 and 2 Samuel verse by verse. We started in January, took a couple of breaks for other studies and for some time off in June, and finally concluded in October. Which is to say, it was a slow and deliberate study.
What a luxury to be able to work through a book of the Bible in such a careful way. I was aided by an excellent commentary, authored by Tony Cartledge and published by Smyth & Helwys.
1 & 2 Samuel cover the stories of Samuel the prophet, Saul the first king of Israel, and David, Saul's successor. It could be subtitled "The Rise and Fall of Saul, then of David," or something like that. Our class chose the study because we were interested in the character of David. We all knew that he started out so well, "The man after God's heart," but ended so badly. We wanted to see what happened.
I also was interested in piecing together all the characters, places, and events of the David cycle. For example, I had heard of Abner or Joab, but wasn't sure who they were.
So I (we, I hope) ended up with a much clearer understanding of Saul and David and their respective rise and fall.
As for insight into what happened to David, I guess we decided his demise was pretty much the same thing that happens to so many of us. He started as simple and obscure and was tapped to play a part in God's plans for war against the Philistines and, later, for leading Israel. As long as he realized his humble state before God and relied on God for guidance, David thrived. When he started depending on his own wisdom and abilities, he started to fail. It's very telling that up to about chapter 7 of 2 Samuel, David continuously consults the LORD through personal prayer or through what was probably the Urim and Thummim. As a result, he has success in every undertaking. But somewhere after chapter 7 or 8, David sort of quits doing that.
The rest of 2 Samuel is dominated by David's downfall. His disastrous affair with the wife of Uriah, and David's assassination of Uriah, are just the first fallout of David's straying from his walk with Yahweh. The horrible story about Amnon, Tamar, and Absalom followed by the story of Absalom's attempted coup d'etat are chilling and horrifying. It's instructive to observe David's weak parenting skills. No doubt if he'd continued to consult Yahweh he would have been a better father. (It's true for most parents.)
Once again, I'm amazed that there has not been a fabulous movie made of the life of David. I suppose it's just too "larger than life." There was something a few years ago with Richard Gere, and a TV show called "Kings," but even they couldn't pull off the scope of the David cycle.
And, once again, the Bible has a hit in one of the most exciting narratives known to literature. As always, the Book is better than a movie.
What a luxury to be able to work through a book of the Bible in such a careful way. I was aided by an excellent commentary, authored by Tony Cartledge and published by Smyth & Helwys.
1 & 2 Samuel cover the stories of Samuel the prophet, Saul the first king of Israel, and David, Saul's successor. It could be subtitled "The Rise and Fall of Saul, then of David," or something like that. Our class chose the study because we were interested in the character of David. We all knew that he started out so well, "The man after God's heart," but ended so badly. We wanted to see what happened.
I also was interested in piecing together all the characters, places, and events of the David cycle. For example, I had heard of Abner or Joab, but wasn't sure who they were.
So I (we, I hope) ended up with a much clearer understanding of Saul and David and their respective rise and fall.
As for insight into what happened to David, I guess we decided his demise was pretty much the same thing that happens to so many of us. He started as simple and obscure and was tapped to play a part in God's plans for war against the Philistines and, later, for leading Israel. As long as he realized his humble state before God and relied on God for guidance, David thrived. When he started depending on his own wisdom and abilities, he started to fail. It's very telling that up to about chapter 7 of 2 Samuel, David continuously consults the LORD through personal prayer or through what was probably the Urim and Thummim. As a result, he has success in every undertaking. But somewhere after chapter 7 or 8, David sort of quits doing that.
The rest of 2 Samuel is dominated by David's downfall. His disastrous affair with the wife of Uriah, and David's assassination of Uriah, are just the first fallout of David's straying from his walk with Yahweh. The horrible story about Amnon, Tamar, and Absalom followed by the story of Absalom's attempted coup d'etat are chilling and horrifying. It's instructive to observe David's weak parenting skills. No doubt if he'd continued to consult Yahweh he would have been a better father. (It's true for most parents.)
Once again, I'm amazed that there has not been a fabulous movie made of the life of David. I suppose it's just too "larger than life." There was something a few years ago with Richard Gere, and a TV show called "Kings," but even they couldn't pull off the scope of the David cycle.
And, once again, the Bible has a hit in one of the most exciting narratives known to literature. As always, the Book is better than a movie.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Ruth: The Best Short Story Ever
While Reading Through The Bible (in alphabetical order, in one year), I came to the book of Ruth on my birthday! (November 8). A little birthday treat for myself.
Ruth has to be on the list of "The Best Short Stories Ever Written." It is so beautiful and satisfying. In a Hebrew class in seminary, we translated it verse by verse and studied it in depth. Turns out, as usual, the more you study and understand the text, the more amazing it is.
I hardly knew anything about the Bible when I married my beloved John. But I was sort of familiar with the book of Ruth, at least with that immortal passage, "Whither thou goest, I will go, and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God. Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried. The LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me." We put that into our wedding vows.
It is such an emotional and dramatic story. And, if you study it very carefully, you can see that it's a tour de force of story telling. Part of our study in that seminary Hebrew class was to write some of the passages as a screenplay. Never has there been a more enjoyable class assignment!
It still stumps me that there haven't been more dramatic interpretations of Ruth. There was that old movie from 1960. I just read the Wikipedia summary; it sounds kind of awful.
Maybe one of these days I will write said screenplay. (Hopefully, it will write itself!) Aside from the drama, the dialog, and the love story, the beauty of the book of Ruth is the confirmation of God's faithfulness to those who are faithful to Him.
Ruth has to be on the list of "The Best Short Stories Ever Written." It is so beautiful and satisfying. In a Hebrew class in seminary, we translated it verse by verse and studied it in depth. Turns out, as usual, the more you study and understand the text, the more amazing it is.
I hardly knew anything about the Bible when I married my beloved John. But I was sort of familiar with the book of Ruth, at least with that immortal passage, "Whither thou goest, I will go, and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God. Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried. The LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me." We put that into our wedding vows.
It is such an emotional and dramatic story. And, if you study it very carefully, you can see that it's a tour de force of story telling. Part of our study in that seminary Hebrew class was to write some of the passages as a screenplay. Never has there been a more enjoyable class assignment!
It still stumps me that there haven't been more dramatic interpretations of Ruth. There was that old movie from 1960. I just read the Wikipedia summary; it sounds kind of awful.
Maybe one of these days I will write said screenplay. (Hopefully, it will write itself!) Aside from the drama, the dialog, and the love story, the beauty of the book of Ruth is the confirmation of God's faithfulness to those who are faithful to Him.
Romans: Paul's Masterpiece
If Revelation is near the bottom of my list of favorite books in the Bible, Romans is near the top. If I'm not mistaken, it was written as a thoughtful, purposeful treatise explaining Christian faith. It certainly delves into the most important issues that a growing Christian (and wouldn't that be all of us?) ought to think about.
It starts by carefully presenting the message of the gospel. First, every human is sinful. Romans 3:23: "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Then it explains that the ONLY way to overcome sin is through God's grace "...and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Chtist Jesus" (Romans 3:24).
There's much more, of course. Paul fleshes out this theology carefully and in easy-to-understand terms. I love chapter 7 where Paul goes personal and describes his struggle with disobedience: "For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing" (Romans 6:18-19). I thought I was the only one who did that!
Chapters 9-11 have more theology about salvation. Chapters 12-16 are more practical, with a discussion of how one's faith should guide one's daily living.
Romans is packed with wonderful stuff, and lots of underline-able passages. My Bible has all kinds of markings in Romans.
But my favorite chapter in Romans is one of my all-time favorites for the whole Bible: Chapter 8. This chapter resounds with encouragement and comfort. It's great to read when we are discouraged or frightened or grieving. "I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us" (8:18). "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will" (8:26-27).
"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose" (8:28). "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (8:31)
And the great triumphant passage, "No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (8:37-39).
That, my friends, is the Living Word of God.
Amen.
It starts by carefully presenting the message of the gospel. First, every human is sinful. Romans 3:23: "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Then it explains that the ONLY way to overcome sin is through God's grace "...and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Chtist Jesus" (Romans 3:24).
There's much more, of course. Paul fleshes out this theology carefully and in easy-to-understand terms. I love chapter 7 where Paul goes personal and describes his struggle with disobedience: "For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing" (Romans 6:18-19). I thought I was the only one who did that!
Chapters 9-11 have more theology about salvation. Chapters 12-16 are more practical, with a discussion of how one's faith should guide one's daily living.
Romans is packed with wonderful stuff, and lots of underline-able passages. My Bible has all kinds of markings in Romans.
But my favorite chapter in Romans is one of my all-time favorites for the whole Bible: Chapter 8. This chapter resounds with encouragement and comfort. It's great to read when we are discouraged or frightened or grieving. "I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us" (8:18). "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will" (8:26-27).
"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose" (8:28). "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (8:31)
And the great triumphant passage, "No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (8:37-39).
That, my friends, is the Living Word of God.
Amen.
Revelation: We win
Whenever I Read Through The Bible, I am always glad to have Revelation in my rearview mirror. Fascinating though it may be, it is one of my least favorite books of the Bible.
I have an ongoing joke with my Sunday School class that I'll cheerfully teach any book of the Bible they want--except Revelation. When I was in seminary, our history professor told us that the book just barely made it into the canon. "The early church fathers were scared to death about it," he said. "They didn't know how to interpret it, and they were afraid they'd get it wrong." There's so much violence in Revelation, that one would definitely fear getting on the wrong side of the interpretation.
Several years ago, I led a class through a study of Revelation prepared by our wonderful, brainy pastor. The only problem was that the study stopped at the end of chapter 3. There is a big conceptual break there. The first three chapters are the letters to the seven New Testament churches. They are hard enough to interpret, but with a good commentary they come alive. Their message, in brief, was warning and encouraging those churches to stay faithful to Christ, to flee from any heresy, to live righteous lives and to endure any persecution that might come their way. Good advice, both then and now.
As for the rest of Revelation, Ugh. It is obscure and hard to interpret because--it was written to be obscure and hard to interpret. It is the very definition of Apocalyptic literature.
That hasn't stopped scholars for two thousand years from trying to figure out what it all means (or meant). So with each new age, there is a different theory of how to interpret Revelation. Just for starters, some scholars believe it was written to the readers of the time and the symbols were to be strictly interpreted in their milieu. Others believe it is strictly prophetic, that all the symbols refer to things that would happen in the future at the end of time, whenever that might be. And there are theories in between. If one is trying to teach through the book of Revelation, one needs to do justice to each of these viewpoints. That takes a ton of time and a ton of study.
Bible scholars, both educated and dimwitted, have then gone on to build elaborate theories about exactly what all the symbols mean. For example, there's this "beast of the sea" character in chapter 13. It's supposed to be some sort of a "personal anti-Christ." Some thought it was Nero. Some thought it was Domitian. Centuries later, some thought it was Napoleon. Hitler was thought to be the anti-Christ in the 20th century. During the past presidential election, one might think this beast of the sea was Obama. Or Romney; I never could tell which side had the more compelling argument.
When I studied Revelation in seminary, I got a kick out of the beast from the earth, also in chapter 13. It seems that this character was sort of the advance man, the public relations guru for the beast of the sea.
The apocalyptic literature just begs to be reinterpreted in every age. That's why the "Left Behind" series of the end of the 20th century was such a hit. It was a rather clunky and slavish imagining of the images in Revelation, updated to the (then) here and now. Perfectly apt for the paranoia surrounding the end of the second Millennium.
I do not know how to interpret Revelation. I do know that pretty much every interpretation ends up at the conclusion that God emerges as the victor over Satan in the cosmic contest between Good and Evil. Or as that brainy pastor used to say, "We win."
I also know that I'm very suspicious of the motivation and the hermeneutical methodology of anyone who thinks he or she knows for sure the meaning of all the details of Revelation.
I have an ongoing joke with my Sunday School class that I'll cheerfully teach any book of the Bible they want--except Revelation. When I was in seminary, our history professor told us that the book just barely made it into the canon. "The early church fathers were scared to death about it," he said. "They didn't know how to interpret it, and they were afraid they'd get it wrong." There's so much violence in Revelation, that one would definitely fear getting on the wrong side of the interpretation.
Several years ago, I led a class through a study of Revelation prepared by our wonderful, brainy pastor. The only problem was that the study stopped at the end of chapter 3. There is a big conceptual break there. The first three chapters are the letters to the seven New Testament churches. They are hard enough to interpret, but with a good commentary they come alive. Their message, in brief, was warning and encouraging those churches to stay faithful to Christ, to flee from any heresy, to live righteous lives and to endure any persecution that might come their way. Good advice, both then and now.
As for the rest of Revelation, Ugh. It is obscure and hard to interpret because--it was written to be obscure and hard to interpret. It is the very definition of Apocalyptic literature.
That hasn't stopped scholars for two thousand years from trying to figure out what it all means (or meant). So with each new age, there is a different theory of how to interpret Revelation. Just for starters, some scholars believe it was written to the readers of the time and the symbols were to be strictly interpreted in their milieu. Others believe it is strictly prophetic, that all the symbols refer to things that would happen in the future at the end of time, whenever that might be. And there are theories in between. If one is trying to teach through the book of Revelation, one needs to do justice to each of these viewpoints. That takes a ton of time and a ton of study.
Bible scholars, both educated and dimwitted, have then gone on to build elaborate theories about exactly what all the symbols mean. For example, there's this "beast of the sea" character in chapter 13. It's supposed to be some sort of a "personal anti-Christ." Some thought it was Nero. Some thought it was Domitian. Centuries later, some thought it was Napoleon. Hitler was thought to be the anti-Christ in the 20th century. During the past presidential election, one might think this beast of the sea was Obama. Or Romney; I never could tell which side had the more compelling argument.
When I studied Revelation in seminary, I got a kick out of the beast from the earth, also in chapter 13. It seems that this character was sort of the advance man, the public relations guru for the beast of the sea.
The apocalyptic literature just begs to be reinterpreted in every age. That's why the "Left Behind" series of the end of the 20th century was such a hit. It was a rather clunky and slavish imagining of the images in Revelation, updated to the (then) here and now. Perfectly apt for the paranoia surrounding the end of the second Millennium.
I do not know how to interpret Revelation. I do know that pretty much every interpretation ends up at the conclusion that God emerges as the victor over Satan in the cosmic contest between Good and Evil. Or as that brainy pastor used to say, "We win."
I also know that I'm very suspicious of the motivation and the hermeneutical methodology of anyone who thinks he or she knows for sure the meaning of all the details of Revelation.
Psalms: Like a Box of Chocolates
I did something radically different this time to Read Through The Bible (in alphabetical order, in one year) when I got to Psalms. I listened to an oral reading of the Psalms, Max McLean on The Listener's Bible. (I saw McLean at Dallas Seminary one time; he was incredible in portraying Abraham.) His sonorous voice brings a lot to Scripture, and it was just the right way to go through the Psalms this time. Here's why:
Psalms is like a box of chocolates. In a couple of ways.
According to Forrest Gump, "You never know what you'll get." Coconut creme or nougat, for example. That's more or less true with the Psalms. Every time you read through the Psalms, you find something different. A favorite old psalm, which you've underlined and memorized, may suddenly reveal a line or a word or a thought that never struck you before. A year or so ago, I was reading the 23rd Psalm, "The Lord is my Shepherd..." I've had this memorized for at least 50 years. But for the first time, I noticed the phrase, "He leads me in the paths of righteousness for His name's sake." That's pretty profound. God wants us to be righteous, and He directs our paths that way, because we are a reflection on His name. If you are known as a Believer (Christian or Jew, I suppose) and you do not live righteously, you can bet there are non-believers who see your behavior and mock your Lord.
So as I listened to Psalms this time, there were psalms I had never noticed because they sounded different, being read out loud.
The other way the Psalms are like a box of chocolates is that one or two, or even five or six, are delicious and delightful. But when you get more than that at one sitting, they start to lose their appeal. There are 150 Psalms, and if you read more than a few at a time, they sometimes start to sound alike. I was listening in the car, so I'd only hear a few each time I'd motor around. Sometimes I'd have to turn off the CD player, however. If I'm maneuvering through difficult traffic, it's hard to pay attention to a CD.
All in all, listening to the Psalms was a good idea. The only drawback was that I wasn't able to underline the lines that stood out as I heard them. Maybe the next time I read them, though, the sound of Max McLean will come through.
Psalms is like a box of chocolates. In a couple of ways.
According to Forrest Gump, "You never know what you'll get." Coconut creme or nougat, for example. That's more or less true with the Psalms. Every time you read through the Psalms, you find something different. A favorite old psalm, which you've underlined and memorized, may suddenly reveal a line or a word or a thought that never struck you before. A year or so ago, I was reading the 23rd Psalm, "The Lord is my Shepherd..." I've had this memorized for at least 50 years. But for the first time, I noticed the phrase, "He leads me in the paths of righteousness for His name's sake." That's pretty profound. God wants us to be righteous, and He directs our paths that way, because we are a reflection on His name. If you are known as a Believer (Christian or Jew, I suppose) and you do not live righteously, you can bet there are non-believers who see your behavior and mock your Lord.
So as I listened to Psalms this time, there were psalms I had never noticed because they sounded different, being read out loud.
The other way the Psalms are like a box of chocolates is that one or two, or even five or six, are delicious and delightful. But when you get more than that at one sitting, they start to lose their appeal. There are 150 Psalms, and if you read more than a few at a time, they sometimes start to sound alike. I was listening in the car, so I'd only hear a few each time I'd motor around. Sometimes I'd have to turn off the CD player, however. If I'm maneuvering through difficult traffic, it's hard to pay attention to a CD.
All in all, listening to the Psalms was a good idea. The only drawback was that I wasn't able to underline the lines that stood out as I heard them. Maybe the next time I read them, though, the sound of Max McLean will come through.
Proverbs: 3,000 Years of Wisdom
Much of Proverbs is attributed to King Solomon. There are a couple of other authors mentioned -- Agur, son of Jakeh and King Lemuel, whoever they were.
Proverbs breaks down into several major sections. After the prologue, chapters 1 through 9 seem to be an address to a young person about getting wisdom and preferring wisdom (which is equated to godliness) to the enticements of the world -- especially the enticements of wicked women. This section is poetic and image-laden. Interesting to read and surprisingly relevant for today. I think it goes without saying that this is timeless, good advice for young and old alike.
The last section is the "Wife of Great Value." I knew a dear lady and great saint once who told her friends to not, by any means, read the passage at her funeral because she was so far from measuring up. (I'm pretty sure that was not the case.) I bet most of us women who run a household read Chapter 31 and compare ourselves with this ideal woman.
A challenge with Proverbs is how to study it. Although the "big chunks" read well and hold together, working through the many chapters of short aphorisms sometimes feels like sitting down with a box of chocolates. At first, you relish each one. But after about ten, they start to taste alike and you get satiated.
Some people like to study Proverbs by reading a chapter each day in the month (31 chapters, get it?). That's not a bad plan, but it breaks up some of the large units that should be read all at once.
The only advice I'd give is to read it over lots of times, marking the passages that strike your fancy. When you get to a passage you've marked before, it will feel like an old friend. And each time you read it, you'll find some new truth you never noticed before.
It is worth noting that Proverbs is part of what they call "Wisdom Literature." It includes very astute observations of the way the world works -- both in 900 B.C. and today. Some of it seems kind of cynical, yet all in all, it has the message that the wicked receive their just punishment and the righteous receive their just rewards, usually in this life.
It's because of this kind of philosophy that books like Job, Ecclesiastes, and some of the Psalms are so wonderful. They take up the complaint of people who find that the world does not always work that way: the wicked prosper and the righteous suffer without meaning.
As faithful believers, we must learn to embrace both philosophies and trust that God is not "self-contradictory," but rather that His scope of justice is simply more than we can comprehend.
Proverbs breaks down into several major sections. After the prologue, chapters 1 through 9 seem to be an address to a young person about getting wisdom and preferring wisdom (which is equated to godliness) to the enticements of the world -- especially the enticements of wicked women. This section is poetic and image-laden. Interesting to read and surprisingly relevant for today. I think it goes without saying that this is timeless, good advice for young and old alike.
The last section is the "Wife of Great Value." I knew a dear lady and great saint once who told her friends to not, by any means, read the passage at her funeral because she was so far from measuring up. (I'm pretty sure that was not the case.) I bet most of us women who run a household read Chapter 31 and compare ourselves with this ideal woman.
A challenge with Proverbs is how to study it. Although the "big chunks" read well and hold together, working through the many chapters of short aphorisms sometimes feels like sitting down with a box of chocolates. At first, you relish each one. But after about ten, they start to taste alike and you get satiated.
Some people like to study Proverbs by reading a chapter each day in the month (31 chapters, get it?). That's not a bad plan, but it breaks up some of the large units that should be read all at once.
The only advice I'd give is to read it over lots of times, marking the passages that strike your fancy. When you get to a passage you've marked before, it will feel like an old friend. And each time you read it, you'll find some new truth you never noticed before.
It is worth noting that Proverbs is part of what they call "Wisdom Literature." It includes very astute observations of the way the world works -- both in 900 B.C. and today. Some of it seems kind of cynical, yet all in all, it has the message that the wicked receive their just punishment and the righteous receive their just rewards, usually in this life.
It's because of this kind of philosophy that books like Job, Ecclesiastes, and some of the Psalms are so wonderful. They take up the complaint of people who find that the world does not always work that way: the wicked prosper and the righteous suffer without meaning.
As faithful believers, we must learn to embrace both philosophies and trust that God is not "self-contradictory," but rather that His scope of justice is simply more than we can comprehend.
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Philippians: Need a lift?
I love the letter to the Philippians. Paul wrote it while he was in prison, most likely in Rome. You wouldn't know that, though, from the tone of the letter.
It's largely a thank-you note for a gift the church in Philippi sent him. He saves that for the end, in 4:10-19.
Most of Paul's letters have lots of advice and some admonitions, even some scoldings. Not Philippians. It's warm and encouraging all the way through.
Some of my favorite passages, ones that I pass on to other people from time to time, are in Philippians.
1:3-4 "I thank my God every time I remember you. in all my prayers for all of you I always pray with joy."
2:13 "For it is God who works in you to will and to act according to His good purpose."
3:13-14 "But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus."
4:4-7 "Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and petition with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus."
4:8 "Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable -- if anything is excellent or praiseworthy -- think about such things."
4:11-13 "For I have learned to be content whatever the circmustances. I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. I can do everything through Him who gives me strength."
4:19 "And my God will meet all your needs according to His glorious riches in Christ Jesus."
On the days when I'm tired, overwhelmed, discouraged -- these passages lift me up. I hope they lift you, too.
It's largely a thank-you note for a gift the church in Philippi sent him. He saves that for the end, in 4:10-19.
Most of Paul's letters have lots of advice and some admonitions, even some scoldings. Not Philippians. It's warm and encouraging all the way through.
Some of my favorite passages, ones that I pass on to other people from time to time, are in Philippians.
1:3-4 "I thank my God every time I remember you. in all my prayers for all of you I always pray with joy."
2:13 "For it is God who works in you to will and to act according to His good purpose."
3:13-14 "But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus."
4:4-7 "Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and petition with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus."
4:8 "Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable -- if anything is excellent or praiseworthy -- think about such things."
4:11-13 "For I have learned to be content whatever the circmustances. I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. I can do everything through Him who gives me strength."
4:19 "And my God will meet all your needs according to His glorious riches in Christ Jesus."
On the days when I'm tired, overwhelmed, discouraged -- these passages lift me up. I hope they lift you, too.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Philemon: Short and sweet
Surprisingly, Philemon gets taught quite a bit in Bible study classes. Care to guess why? Because it's really short!
And, I think, because it's really sweet. It's a letter Paul wrote to a friend whose slave had run away and come to Paul. Paul was sending the slave back home, with a letter exhorting the friend, Philemon, to accept the runaway graciously and as a Christian brother.
I like the letter because it seems so personal. Paul wasn't writing down any great theological treatise or answering any knotty questions, or admonishing any backsliding believers. Well, actually he was. The letter to Philemon does deal with the issue of God's grace to sinners, the body of Christ among the fellowship of believers, moral obligations of believers, and so on.
I like the way the letter starts with some friendly affirmation. I like the little word play. The name of the slave, "Onesimus," means "useful," and Paul wrote that he had become useful to Paul in prison. I like the part about "I'll take care of any financial obligations--although, if you remember, you owe your very salvation to me."
And I always like the cheerful request to prepare a room because Paul was planning to come visit soon.
The whole letter--25 verses--is just so intimate, friendly, earnest.
And sweet.
And, I think, because it's really sweet. It's a letter Paul wrote to a friend whose slave had run away and come to Paul. Paul was sending the slave back home, with a letter exhorting the friend, Philemon, to accept the runaway graciously and as a Christian brother.
I like the letter because it seems so personal. Paul wasn't writing down any great theological treatise or answering any knotty questions, or admonishing any backsliding believers. Well, actually he was. The letter to Philemon does deal with the issue of God's grace to sinners, the body of Christ among the fellowship of believers, moral obligations of believers, and so on.
I like the way the letter starts with some friendly affirmation. I like the little word play. The name of the slave, "Onesimus," means "useful," and Paul wrote that he had become useful to Paul in prison. I like the part about "I'll take care of any financial obligations--although, if you remember, you owe your very salvation to me."
And I always like the cheerful request to prepare a room because Paul was planning to come visit soon.
The whole letter--25 verses--is just so intimate, friendly, earnest.
And sweet.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Peter: There is still hope
First and Second Peter. I like to read these and think about the great disciple, Peter the fisherman. I have to admit that although I have studied these two letters a time or two, they've never left a huge impression on me. Except, perhaps, for a few thoughts.
When I was in seminary, I read the passage 2 Peter 3:6-7; "By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men." And, "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare" (2 Peter 3:10). I have this uncomfortable feeling that this "prophecy" could tie in with global warming. Perhaps the world is slowly being burned up?
But, I don't like to think about eschatology. Way too disturbing, and way too many theories. And there's not a whole lot I can do in any event.
I presume there is a great deal of profound Christology and theology in 1 & 2 Peter. I've forgotten most of what I ever learned. I remember hearing a friend talk about the Bible study she was in where the teacher (a pastor) spent several sessions on the passage in 1 Peter 3:19-20 "...through whom also he [Jesus] went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built..." The big question here is, "What does 'spirits in prison' mean?" I don't have a clue.
To me, the big message of 1 & 2 Peter is "Live good, godly, loving lives; especialy if you are living among hostile pagans." It's The Right Thing To Do, and the pagans may be shamed or swayed by your goodness.
Another big message is the hope we have based on Christ's work; his triumph over death and evil, and his ultimate return and restoration. Peter wrote to people who were undergoing persecution. His message of hope and perseverance applies to anyone going through trials.
There are some wonderful quotable passages from 1 & 2 Peter:
"But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander" (1 Peter 3:15-16).
"Above all, love each other deeply because love covers over a multitude of sins" (1 Peter 4:8).
"Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you" (1 Peter 5:6-7).
"Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour" (1 Peter 5:8).
"For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness, and to goodness, knowledge, and to knowledge, self-control, and to self-control, perseverance, and to perseverance, godliness and to godliness, brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness, love" (2 Peter 1:5-7).
And finally, as kind of an antidote to the scary passage mentioned above, "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:8-9).
There is still hope.
When I was in seminary, I read the passage 2 Peter 3:6-7; "By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men." And, "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare" (2 Peter 3:10). I have this uncomfortable feeling that this "prophecy" could tie in with global warming. Perhaps the world is slowly being burned up?
But, I don't like to think about eschatology. Way too disturbing, and way too many theories. And there's not a whole lot I can do in any event.
I presume there is a great deal of profound Christology and theology in 1 & 2 Peter. I've forgotten most of what I ever learned. I remember hearing a friend talk about the Bible study she was in where the teacher (a pastor) spent several sessions on the passage in 1 Peter 3:19-20 "...through whom also he [Jesus] went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built..." The big question here is, "What does 'spirits in prison' mean?" I don't have a clue.
To me, the big message of 1 & 2 Peter is "Live good, godly, loving lives; especialy if you are living among hostile pagans." It's The Right Thing To Do, and the pagans may be shamed or swayed by your goodness.
Another big message is the hope we have based on Christ's work; his triumph over death and evil, and his ultimate return and restoration. Peter wrote to people who were undergoing persecution. His message of hope and perseverance applies to anyone going through trials.
There are some wonderful quotable passages from 1 & 2 Peter:
"But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander" (1 Peter 3:15-16).
"Above all, love each other deeply because love covers over a multitude of sins" (1 Peter 4:8).
"Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you" (1 Peter 5:6-7).
"Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour" (1 Peter 5:8).
"For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness, and to goodness, knowledge, and to knowledge, self-control, and to self-control, perseverance, and to perseverance, godliness and to godliness, brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness, love" (2 Peter 1:5-7).
And finally, as kind of an antidote to the scary passage mentioned above, "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:8-9).
There is still hope.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Obadiah: Warning to prideful gloaters
There are only 21 verses in Obadiah. If you are flipping through your Bible, you really might miss it.
And, six of the verses are repeated in Jeremiah.
Basically, the message of Obadiah is "God will exact judgment on Edom because they gloated over the disaster that befell Israel."
Let this be a lesson to the prideful and the gloaters. God hates that kind of thinking and behavior as much as all of us mortals do.
The only thing I'd add to this blog regarding Obadiah is a personal anecdote.
Several years ago, before I attended Dallas Seminary but when I was already an admirer, we had a new minister at our church who was a DTS graduate. Mindful of what an excellent job DTS does of educating students about all the books of the Bible, I asked this man, halfway in jest, what was the message, or rather the point, of Obadiah. He didn't have an answer.
That would not be very memorable, except for this. He told me he didn't know, but I recall a definite sense of haughty disdain for me and my question. (I'm very sensitive to slights, dontcha know.) Perhaps that's why my view of him was jaded going forward. I found him to be supercilious and pretentious. He let all of us know how holy he was. He and his wife refused to tell their tiny children about Santa Claus because that was a distortion of Christmas. He preached a sermon one night (he was not one of the main preachers) that tried very hard to be culturally relevant, depending on the "profound" lyrics of a well-known pop song that is in itself way overrated. The sermon was silly. And ultimately, he left the church staff under unpleasant circumstances.
I guess I feel as if he got his just rewards for his pridefulness, which is part of the message of Obadiah.
However, I confess that I, too, am violating the message of Obadiah by gloating over the man's departure!
And, six of the verses are repeated in Jeremiah.
Basically, the message of Obadiah is "God will exact judgment on Edom because they gloated over the disaster that befell Israel."
Let this be a lesson to the prideful and the gloaters. God hates that kind of thinking and behavior as much as all of us mortals do.
The only thing I'd add to this blog regarding Obadiah is a personal anecdote.
Several years ago, before I attended Dallas Seminary but when I was already an admirer, we had a new minister at our church who was a DTS graduate. Mindful of what an excellent job DTS does of educating students about all the books of the Bible, I asked this man, halfway in jest, what was the message, or rather the point, of Obadiah. He didn't have an answer.
That would not be very memorable, except for this. He told me he didn't know, but I recall a definite sense of haughty disdain for me and my question. (I'm very sensitive to slights, dontcha know.) Perhaps that's why my view of him was jaded going forward. I found him to be supercilious and pretentious. He let all of us know how holy he was. He and his wife refused to tell their tiny children about Santa Claus because that was a distortion of Christmas. He preached a sermon one night (he was not one of the main preachers) that tried very hard to be culturally relevant, depending on the "profound" lyrics of a well-known pop song that is in itself way overrated. The sermon was silly. And ultimately, he left the church staff under unpleasant circumstances.
I guess I feel as if he got his just rewards for his pridefulness, which is part of the message of Obadiah.
However, I confess that I, too, am violating the message of Obadiah by gloating over the man's departure!
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Numbers: and more numbers and more numbers
The Greek Jews who translated this book of the Torah from the Hebrew called it "Numbers" because of all its lists of people. The Hebrew Bible title would be "In the Desert," which may be a more apt description.
Numbers is about the wandering about of the Jews in the desert, after the Exodus, and before they entered Canaan. It centers on Moses, and Aaron to a lesser extent, as they tried their best to lead the ornery Israelites.
I think my favorite part is abotu Balak and Balaam. Balak was a king of Moab, and he wanted to keep the Israelites from tramping over his land. He sent work to Balaam, who was some weird sort of mercenary prophet. Balak wanted Balaam to come and curse the Israelites. Balaam held out--perhaps for larger fees--but with the excuse that Yahweh wouldn't let him curse His people. Eventually, Balaam was given permission by God to go see Balak. But not before Balaam's donkey had to speak out loud to warn him against crossing God's will. See Numbers 22:21-34. Great stuff.
The story continues that Balaam ends up blessing Israel (take that, Balak!). But later on, it turns out that he urged the Moabite women to lure the Israelite men into sinful behavior, bringing on God's great wrath.
There are some great stories about Moses, too. One of the most bewildering is in 20:1-13. Here, the people are dying of thirst. God tells Moses to "speak to the rock" for water. Moses gets super-annoyed with the whining Israelites and smacks the rock with his staff. Water comes out of the rock, but God informs Moses that because he didn't speak to the rock as instructed, Moses will not be allowed to enter the Promised Land. I know God wants absolute obedience; that's the lesson here. But I bet I'm not the only one who thinks that was a little harsh.
One other great Moses passage. In Numbers 11:10-15, Moses gets reeeaaallly tired of hearing the Israelites gripe, wail and moan. He finally voices his complaint to God--at some length--ending with "I cannot carry all these people by myself; the burden is too heavy for me. If this is how you are going to treat me, put me to death right now."
If you have ever been in a leadership position, I'm sure you can relate to this!
The last point about Numbers. If you are reading it, and find yourself skimming over the lists and lists and lists, rest assured you're not the only one who has skimmed it.
Numbers is about the wandering about of the Jews in the desert, after the Exodus, and before they entered Canaan. It centers on Moses, and Aaron to a lesser extent, as they tried their best to lead the ornery Israelites.
I think my favorite part is abotu Balak and Balaam. Balak was a king of Moab, and he wanted to keep the Israelites from tramping over his land. He sent work to Balaam, who was some weird sort of mercenary prophet. Balak wanted Balaam to come and curse the Israelites. Balaam held out--perhaps for larger fees--but with the excuse that Yahweh wouldn't let him curse His people. Eventually, Balaam was given permission by God to go see Balak. But not before Balaam's donkey had to speak out loud to warn him against crossing God's will. See Numbers 22:21-34. Great stuff.
The story continues that Balaam ends up blessing Israel (take that, Balak!). But later on, it turns out that he urged the Moabite women to lure the Israelite men into sinful behavior, bringing on God's great wrath.
There are some great stories about Moses, too. One of the most bewildering is in 20:1-13. Here, the people are dying of thirst. God tells Moses to "speak to the rock" for water. Moses gets super-annoyed with the whining Israelites and smacks the rock with his staff. Water comes out of the rock, but God informs Moses that because he didn't speak to the rock as instructed, Moses will not be allowed to enter the Promised Land. I know God wants absolute obedience; that's the lesson here. But I bet I'm not the only one who thinks that was a little harsh.
One other great Moses passage. In Numbers 11:10-15, Moses gets reeeaaallly tired of hearing the Israelites gripe, wail and moan. He finally voices his complaint to God--at some length--ending with "I cannot carry all these people by myself; the burden is too heavy for me. If this is how you are going to treat me, put me to death right now."
If you have ever been in a leadership position, I'm sure you can relate to this!
The last point about Numbers. If you are reading it, and find yourself skimming over the lists and lists and lists, rest assured you're not the only one who has skimmed it.
Micah: He has showed you, O man.
It's October, and I'm getting close-ish to the end of this year-long Read Through The Bible in alphabetical order. But I have a ways to go yet, and actually I'm way behind on writing up my blogs!
So. Micah. It's nice and short. You might think of it as "Isaiah Lite" but that's probably not fair. He was a contemporary of Isaiah, and sections of the two prophets are the same. Scholars aren't sure whether one of them copied from the other or whether they both used a common source. I like Micah because it ends on a positive, hopeful note.
Micah may be best known for two passages. One is the prophecy about the birthplace of Messiah: "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small amongh the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times." This is what the chief priests and teachers of the law read to King Herod when he asked them where the new king of the Jews would be born, Matthew 2:6.
The other passage, and one of my personal favorites, is Micah 6:6-8:
With what shall I come before the LORD and bow down before the exalted God?
Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old?
Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I offer the firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
Ok, this is old-fashioned, Old Testament-type language, asking "What are we supposed to DO to please God?" Going through the motions of religion, even "sacrificial giving" won't cut it. Actually, the only thing we can do to "get right" with God is trust and believe Him that He sent Christ to die for our sins.
The passage continues:
He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
Remember--this won't get you into heaven; only saving faith does that (see above!)
However, this is really excellent advice about how we are to live our lives as godly people. It applies to anyone, of course, including Christians.
I think it's interesting to compare this with Jesus' reply when He was asked, "What is the greatest commandment?" See Mark 12:28-34 and Matthew 22:34-40. His answer was: "Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength," a direct quote from Deuteronomy 6:4-5. Also, "Love your neighbor as yourself," a direct quote from Leviticus 19:18.
If I had students to whom I could make writing assignments, I would have them write an essay comparing the two passages. Briefly, I think the comparison would go something like this:
To act justly and to love mercy reflects the way we are to relate to our fellow man; it parallels "Love your neighbor as yourself." Wouldn't we want everyone to treat us with justice and to be merciful toward us?
To walk humbly with your God reflects the way we are to relate to God. If we see God as our greatest object of worship, love and respect, does it not follow that we are in a humble position before Him? And "to walk" is another way of describing our sense that God is always present in our lives.
So. Micah. It's nice and short. You might think of it as "Isaiah Lite" but that's probably not fair. He was a contemporary of Isaiah, and sections of the two prophets are the same. Scholars aren't sure whether one of them copied from the other or whether they both used a common source. I like Micah because it ends on a positive, hopeful note.
Micah may be best known for two passages. One is the prophecy about the birthplace of Messiah: "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small amongh the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times." This is what the chief priests and teachers of the law read to King Herod when he asked them where the new king of the Jews would be born, Matthew 2:6.
The other passage, and one of my personal favorites, is Micah 6:6-8:
With what shall I come before the LORD and bow down before the exalted God?
Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old?
Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I offer the firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
Ok, this is old-fashioned, Old Testament-type language, asking "What are we supposed to DO to please God?" Going through the motions of religion, even "sacrificial giving" won't cut it. Actually, the only thing we can do to "get right" with God is trust and believe Him that He sent Christ to die for our sins.
The passage continues:
He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
Remember--this won't get you into heaven; only saving faith does that (see above!)
However, this is really excellent advice about how we are to live our lives as godly people. It applies to anyone, of course, including Christians.
I think it's interesting to compare this with Jesus' reply when He was asked, "What is the greatest commandment?" See Mark 12:28-34 and Matthew 22:34-40. His answer was: "Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength," a direct quote from Deuteronomy 6:4-5. Also, "Love your neighbor as yourself," a direct quote from Leviticus 19:18.
If I had students to whom I could make writing assignments, I would have them write an essay comparing the two passages. Briefly, I think the comparison would go something like this:
To act justly and to love mercy reflects the way we are to relate to our fellow man; it parallels "Love your neighbor as yourself." Wouldn't we want everyone to treat us with justice and to be merciful toward us?
To walk humbly with your God reflects the way we are to relate to God. If we see God as our greatest object of worship, love and respect, does it not follow that we are in a humble position before Him? And "to walk" is another way of describing our sense that God is always present in our lives.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Nehemiah: A Role Model for All Times
Nehemiah is a continuation of Ezra, but I always like it better. Maybe it's because of the picture in my mind of the two eponymous characters. Ezra always seems like a kind of radical priest, almost reminding me of the Ayatollahs in today's Islam. But Nehemiah strikes me as the consummate diplomat and businessman who is also a devout believer.
Nehemiah is introduced as the cupbearer to King Artaxerxes. I'm not sure exactly what that is, but it might be similar to the chief of the king's personal security force. It would seem that Nehemiah had earned the king's complete trust as well as respect. Nehemiah hears that the city of Jerusalem, recently repopulated by Jews returning from exile, has not fared well; the city walls are in ruins and the people are being taunted and harrassed by the neighbors. He asks for the king's blessing and some provisions to journey to Jerusalem to do what he can to help.
I wish I could meet Nehemiah. He sounds like a man I would like to know. As a leader, he displays a mixture of spiritual devotion and practicality. He always sets the example, persuades people to catch his vision and follow his lead. He seems to be the first up in the morning and the last to sleep at night. He never asks anyone to do what he wouldn't be willing to do himself.
When Nehemiah confronts adversaries, either political foes or even wrong-doers among the Jews, he is blunt and clear about what he's thinking. He seems to be deliberate about what he wants from them and he gets it.
Again, since I'm reading this during the 2012 presidential election season, I find myself wondering how much the two candidates, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, resemble Nehemiah and his leadership.
The civic project of rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem is pretty interesting. Nehemiah describes the project, and then details who was responsible for the work. It reminds me of the huge capital projects I've witnessed--a couple of buildings at our church, the arts district in Dallas, and such. In each of these modern-day projects, you can find inscriptions of the big donors (I love the wall at the Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center). Perhaps these listings of the workers in the biblical record are like that.
One of the other things I really love about Nehemiah is the little prayers that are embedded throughout the book. There are prayers of confession, of imprecation, and prayers asking God to remember Nehemiah with favor, or for immediate help in a situation. My favorites are the little quick ones that are spur of the moment. I think that may be part of the reason for Nehemiah's stature. He infused his daily life with constant communication with God and made it a priority to follow God's lead.
One can find few better role models in the Bible or in history than Nehemiah.
Nehemiah is introduced as the cupbearer to King Artaxerxes. I'm not sure exactly what that is, but it might be similar to the chief of the king's personal security force. It would seem that Nehemiah had earned the king's complete trust as well as respect. Nehemiah hears that the city of Jerusalem, recently repopulated by Jews returning from exile, has not fared well; the city walls are in ruins and the people are being taunted and harrassed by the neighbors. He asks for the king's blessing and some provisions to journey to Jerusalem to do what he can to help.
I wish I could meet Nehemiah. He sounds like a man I would like to know. As a leader, he displays a mixture of spiritual devotion and practicality. He always sets the example, persuades people to catch his vision and follow his lead. He seems to be the first up in the morning and the last to sleep at night. He never asks anyone to do what he wouldn't be willing to do himself.
When Nehemiah confronts adversaries, either political foes or even wrong-doers among the Jews, he is blunt and clear about what he's thinking. He seems to be deliberate about what he wants from them and he gets it.
Again, since I'm reading this during the 2012 presidential election season, I find myself wondering how much the two candidates, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, resemble Nehemiah and his leadership.
The civic project of rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem is pretty interesting. Nehemiah describes the project, and then details who was responsible for the work. It reminds me of the huge capital projects I've witnessed--a couple of buildings at our church, the arts district in Dallas, and such. In each of these modern-day projects, you can find inscriptions of the big donors (I love the wall at the Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center). Perhaps these listings of the workers in the biblical record are like that.
One of the other things I really love about Nehemiah is the little prayers that are embedded throughout the book. There are prayers of confession, of imprecation, and prayers asking God to remember Nehemiah with favor, or for immediate help in a situation. My favorites are the little quick ones that are spur of the moment. I think that may be part of the reason for Nehemiah's stature. He infused his daily life with constant communication with God and made it a priority to follow God's lead.
One can find few better role models in the Bible or in history than Nehemiah.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Matthew and Mark
Matthew and Mark are next to each other in the Bible. If you're reading through the Bible in alphabetical order, of course, Mark comes first, followed immediately by Matthew.
And if you read through the Gospels in quick succession, you may notice that there are very similar passages. This time, I actually found myself wondering if I'd put my bookmark in the right place!
I knew about this. In fact, I think it was this idea of the overlap of the Gospels that first pulled me into serious Bible study.
Matthew and Mark, along with Luke, are called the Synoptic Gospels. The three Gospels have a similar viewpoint and a huge amount of common content. John's Gospel contains some of the same material, but is quite a bit different. I've always felt that the author of John, which scholars believe was written a few decades after the synoptic Gospels, may have read the other texts and felt compelled to add in his own viewpoint.
Since Matthew, Mark and Luke have much of the same material--some of it almost but not precisely verbatim--scholars have wrestled for decades, or centuries at this point, about how they came together. Which came first? Who borrowed from whom? Or was there another document (Q or Quelle) that was the source for all three? And what accounts for the material that is unique to each Gospel? This is a fascinating and complex subject. I took a whole-semester course on the topic in Seminary, and still just felt like we raised more questions than we answered.
The best part of the Gospels is the scintillating picture of Jesus they present. I've been reading these books and hearing Jesus stories for so very long that I'm used to them. I can only imagine how they would astound someone who had never heard of Jesus or of His teaching.
Here are a few random thoughts that struck me on this read-through.
Mark: Chapter 4 has the parables of the sower, the mustard seed, and the growing seed, which is unique to Mark. These are all about how the word of God is spread and how it takes effect. I was encouraged that the "work" that I do in spreading God's word is carried out by God Himself in mysterious ways; it's not all on my shoulders.
In Mark 12:28ff, a teacher of the Law asks Jesus which is the greatest commandment. Often, Jesus would parry such a question, as He did with "Should we pay taxes to Caesar?" For this question, though, Jesus gives a straightforward and authoritative answer: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength; and Love your neighbor as yourself. Both are direct quotes from the Torah.
Things that caught my attention in Matthew:
Matthew 24 is about the signs of the end of the age. In Matthew 24:10-12, Jesus says, "At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and decive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness the love of most will grow cold." I've been reading this during the ramp-up to the presidential election of 2012. I have been more distressed than usual about what feels to me like hard-hearted social policies. I'm concerned about reproductive and women's rights, about opportunities for immigrants, about the stratification of economic classes. I've also been appalled at the vile and hateful political screed I hear. It just made me wonder if these are signs of the end of the age.
Similarly, the parable of the wicked manager made me wonder if our politicians aren't like him, "...he begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards" (Matthew 24:49).
In Matthew 26:24, Jesus says, "The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man. It would be better for him if he had not been born." This raises that knotty issue of predestination, divine sovereignty, free will, etc. I guess it underscores the notion that God has a master plan for all things and all people -- AND -- that people bring these things about through their choices. It seems like Judas could have chosen not to betray Jesus. But he did, and, yes, it would have been better for him if he had not been born.
Last thought about Matthew, and the other Gospels' portrayal of Jesus. Again, how would these words fall on fresh ears? Or, how would people react to the accounts of Jesus if they didn't have any reason to associate them with the Divine? Would people still puzzle and marvel as much as we do when we believe they are God-breathed?
If it's been a while since you have read the Gospels, do yourself a favor and sit down for a good page turner.
And if you read through the Gospels in quick succession, you may notice that there are very similar passages. This time, I actually found myself wondering if I'd put my bookmark in the right place!
I knew about this. In fact, I think it was this idea of the overlap of the Gospels that first pulled me into serious Bible study.
Matthew and Mark, along with Luke, are called the Synoptic Gospels. The three Gospels have a similar viewpoint and a huge amount of common content. John's Gospel contains some of the same material, but is quite a bit different. I've always felt that the author of John, which scholars believe was written a few decades after the synoptic Gospels, may have read the other texts and felt compelled to add in his own viewpoint.
Since Matthew, Mark and Luke have much of the same material--some of it almost but not precisely verbatim--scholars have wrestled for decades, or centuries at this point, about how they came together. Which came first? Who borrowed from whom? Or was there another document (Q or Quelle) that was the source for all three? And what accounts for the material that is unique to each Gospel? This is a fascinating and complex subject. I took a whole-semester course on the topic in Seminary, and still just felt like we raised more questions than we answered.
The best part of the Gospels is the scintillating picture of Jesus they present. I've been reading these books and hearing Jesus stories for so very long that I'm used to them. I can only imagine how they would astound someone who had never heard of Jesus or of His teaching.
Here are a few random thoughts that struck me on this read-through.
Mark: Chapter 4 has the parables of the sower, the mustard seed, and the growing seed, which is unique to Mark. These are all about how the word of God is spread and how it takes effect. I was encouraged that the "work" that I do in spreading God's word is carried out by God Himself in mysterious ways; it's not all on my shoulders.
In Mark 12:28ff, a teacher of the Law asks Jesus which is the greatest commandment. Often, Jesus would parry such a question, as He did with "Should we pay taxes to Caesar?" For this question, though, Jesus gives a straightforward and authoritative answer: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength; and Love your neighbor as yourself. Both are direct quotes from the Torah.
Things that caught my attention in Matthew:
Matthew 24 is about the signs of the end of the age. In Matthew 24:10-12, Jesus says, "At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and decive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness the love of most will grow cold." I've been reading this during the ramp-up to the presidential election of 2012. I have been more distressed than usual about what feels to me like hard-hearted social policies. I'm concerned about reproductive and women's rights, about opportunities for immigrants, about the stratification of economic classes. I've also been appalled at the vile and hateful political screed I hear. It just made me wonder if these are signs of the end of the age.
Similarly, the parable of the wicked manager made me wonder if our politicians aren't like him, "...he begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards" (Matthew 24:49).
In Matthew 26:24, Jesus says, "The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man. It would be better for him if he had not been born." This raises that knotty issue of predestination, divine sovereignty, free will, etc. I guess it underscores the notion that God has a master plan for all things and all people -- AND -- that people bring these things about through their choices. It seems like Judas could have chosen not to betray Jesus. But he did, and, yes, it would have been better for him if he had not been born.
Last thought about Matthew, and the other Gospels' portrayal of Jesus. Again, how would these words fall on fresh ears? Or, how would people react to the accounts of Jesus if they didn't have any reason to associate them with the Divine? Would people still puzzle and marvel as much as we do when we believe they are God-breathed?
If it's been a while since you have read the Gospels, do yourself a favor and sit down for a good page turner.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Malachi: Minor Prophet; Major Impact
Malachi is another one of the "minor prophets" that have major impact. It is the last book in the Protestant Christian Bible. (It's not the last in the Hebrew Bible, and the Catholic Bible has the Apocrypha).
It may be dated to about 433 B.C. and was probably the last prophetic book to be written before the coming of Christ. In fact, it seems to directly anticipate the Messiah.
I love this book; it is so relevant, even today. It takes the form of a dialog between the prophet, speaking for God, and the people of Israel (which should include us).
Some of the issues may seem arcane, but they aren't. The first chapter talks about blemished sacrifices, that is, bulls or whatever that were injured or imperfect and not acceptable for religious sacrifices. Obviously we don't sacrifice animals (or even our first fruits or sheaves of wheat) anymore, but we, too, can have blemished sacrifices. The only reason someone would offer less than the best to Yahweh was because they were insincere or stingy. I suspect those are the very reasons many Christians today don't give to God as generously as they should.
Chapter 2 discusses half-hearted, corrupt and hypocritical religious leaders. God hated them in 433 B.C. He hates them today.
Chapter 2 also discusses marrying spouses who worship a foreign god and divorce. Both were abhorent in those days on two levels. They were forbidden by Mosaic Law, for one thing. For another, they were metaphors for infidelity and impurity in worshiping Yahweh. Adultery is a common motif in the Bible for portraying the worship of pagan gods.
Sadly, adultery and divorce don't seem to be as abhorent today as they were then. I'm not going to jump on a soap box about divorce--I've known too many cases where it may have been the best alternative. Personally, I just think people should be a little more careful about making a marriage commitment in the first place. As for adultery--it's never okay. And, hopping on the soap box for a moment, how come our society gets all riled up about homosexuality but not about adultery? How many families and lives have been wrecked by two people of the same sex being in love? And how does that compare with the number of wrecked lives and families resulting from marital infidelity?
Malachi also takes aim at people who are cynical about faith in God. It wearies God when people give up and say that God is not just and righteous. I think many today may not come out and say that, but many do act as if they don't believe God will punish the wicked. Malachi states that God will indeed bring charges against "sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers, against those who defraud laborers of their wages, who oppress the fatherless, and deprive aliens of justice, but do not fear...the LORD Almighty (Malachi 3:5).
Passages in Malachi anticipate Messiah. Malachi 3:1-4 are quoted in Handel's Messiah. Or how about this: "But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings" (Malachi 4:2). Sound familiar? At Christmas, be sure to sing "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing!"
I also love the last two verses of Malachi. "See, I will send you the great prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the LORD comes. He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers; or else I will come and strike the land with a curse." I think this is why the Jews of Jesus' day, and today as well, expected that the ancient prophet Elijah would appear right before Messiah. The Gospels mention that people were asking if Jesus was Elijah, or if Elijah had already come. Jesus affirmed that John the Baptist fulfilled the appearance of Elijah. See Matthew 11:13-14; 17:12-13; Mark 9:11-13. Also, read the description of John the Baptist in Luke 1:17--a direct quote from Malachi.
Still, the passage in Malachi that means the most to me is 3:8-10. "Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you ask, 'How do we rob you?' In tithes and offerings. You are under a curse--the whole nation of you--because you are robbing me. Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Trust me in this," says the LORD Almighty,"and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it."
This passage was life-changing to me several years ago. It made me realize that giving to God is a matter of faith and trust. God doesn't need anything we think we might be giving to Him. The point is that we are to be obedient. Even more so, the point is when we give sacrifically of something important, something that we need ourselves to sustain our life (e.g., money or crops for the ancient Jews), we are showing implicit trust that God will take care of our needs. This passage states that not only will God replace our little sacrifice, He will "open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing..."
Trust and obedience given to God in sincere faith yield blessings from God in return. What are the blessings? Well, you don't really know till you step out in faith and give God the trust and obedience He asks for. Try it. See what blessings come your way.
It may be dated to about 433 B.C. and was probably the last prophetic book to be written before the coming of Christ. In fact, it seems to directly anticipate the Messiah.
I love this book; it is so relevant, even today. It takes the form of a dialog between the prophet, speaking for God, and the people of Israel (which should include us).
Some of the issues may seem arcane, but they aren't. The first chapter talks about blemished sacrifices, that is, bulls or whatever that were injured or imperfect and not acceptable for religious sacrifices. Obviously we don't sacrifice animals (or even our first fruits or sheaves of wheat) anymore, but we, too, can have blemished sacrifices. The only reason someone would offer less than the best to Yahweh was because they were insincere or stingy. I suspect those are the very reasons many Christians today don't give to God as generously as they should.
Chapter 2 discusses half-hearted, corrupt and hypocritical religious leaders. God hated them in 433 B.C. He hates them today.
Chapter 2 also discusses marrying spouses who worship a foreign god and divorce. Both were abhorent in those days on two levels. They were forbidden by Mosaic Law, for one thing. For another, they were metaphors for infidelity and impurity in worshiping Yahweh. Adultery is a common motif in the Bible for portraying the worship of pagan gods.
Sadly, adultery and divorce don't seem to be as abhorent today as they were then. I'm not going to jump on a soap box about divorce--I've known too many cases where it may have been the best alternative. Personally, I just think people should be a little more careful about making a marriage commitment in the first place. As for adultery--it's never okay. And, hopping on the soap box for a moment, how come our society gets all riled up about homosexuality but not about adultery? How many families and lives have been wrecked by two people of the same sex being in love? And how does that compare with the number of wrecked lives and families resulting from marital infidelity?
Malachi also takes aim at people who are cynical about faith in God. It wearies God when people give up and say that God is not just and righteous. I think many today may not come out and say that, but many do act as if they don't believe God will punish the wicked. Malachi states that God will indeed bring charges against "sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers, against those who defraud laborers of their wages, who oppress the fatherless, and deprive aliens of justice, but do not fear...the LORD Almighty (Malachi 3:5).
Passages in Malachi anticipate Messiah. Malachi 3:1-4 are quoted in Handel's Messiah. Or how about this: "But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings" (Malachi 4:2). Sound familiar? At Christmas, be sure to sing "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing!"
I also love the last two verses of Malachi. "See, I will send you the great prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the LORD comes. He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers; or else I will come and strike the land with a curse." I think this is why the Jews of Jesus' day, and today as well, expected that the ancient prophet Elijah would appear right before Messiah. The Gospels mention that people were asking if Jesus was Elijah, or if Elijah had already come. Jesus affirmed that John the Baptist fulfilled the appearance of Elijah. See Matthew 11:13-14; 17:12-13; Mark 9:11-13. Also, read the description of John the Baptist in Luke 1:17--a direct quote from Malachi.
Still, the passage in Malachi that means the most to me is 3:8-10. "Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you ask, 'How do we rob you?' In tithes and offerings. You are under a curse--the whole nation of you--because you are robbing me. Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Trust me in this," says the LORD Almighty,"and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it."
This passage was life-changing to me several years ago. It made me realize that giving to God is a matter of faith and trust. God doesn't need anything we think we might be giving to Him. The point is that we are to be obedient. Even more so, the point is when we give sacrifically of something important, something that we need ourselves to sustain our life (e.g., money or crops for the ancient Jews), we are showing implicit trust that God will take care of our needs. This passage states that not only will God replace our little sacrifice, He will "open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing..."
Trust and obedience given to God in sincere faith yield blessings from God in return. What are the blessings? Well, you don't really know till you step out in faith and give God the trust and obedience He asks for. Try it. See what blessings come your way.
Friday, September 14, 2012
My Obsession with Luke
Ah, Luke. My favorite Gospel. Or, at least it's one of my favorite Gospels. I love all of them.
Luke, however, resonates with me in a different way. I guess I've always been captivated by the author. The Book of Luke, and its sequel, Acts, are attributed to a doctor who accompanied Paul on some of his missionary journeys. The introduction to both Luke and Acts state that the author did extensive research, including interviews with eyewitnesses. His purpose was to write an orderly account so that Theophilus, whoever that might have been, might "know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed" (Luke 1:4).
Not much is known about Luke. He was probably Greek, well-educated, perhaps a former slave. It appears that he may have first met Paul in Syrian Antioch. After that, pretty much everything else is speculation.
Many years ago, I became fascinated with the idea of how and why Dr. Luke went about researching and writing this account of Jesus. As I studied it more closely, I learned that there are several wonderful sections that are unique to Luke: For example, the whole birth narrative, including the stories about Elizabeth, Zachariah and John as well as the annunciation of the birth to Mary, are only found in Luke. Mark has a little bit of birth narrative that dovetails with Luke's information.
Or, there are some 17 parables that are found only in Luke--The Prodigal Son, the Lost Coin, Lazarus and the Rich Man, etc.
One thought is that Luke used the works of Mark and Matthew but supplemented them with his own research. In particular, he may have had exclusive interviews with people who knew Jesus. There's another matter. Maybe Luke wrote his books at the request of Theophilus. But somewhere I read a theory that Luke wrote the account of Jesus to be sort of a legal brief for Paul when he went to trial in Rome. I love that!
Fascination turned to obsession for me. And obsession turned into my unpublished novel. I took the idea of a friendship between Paul and Luke, the need to prepare an orderly account about Jesus, and the evidence that Luke did eyewitness interviews and fleshed out a tale. It's written in the first person, through Luke's eyes, and is organized around a journey from Antioch, on the missionary journeys, and then to Caesarea, where Paul was imprisoned. After that, the story follows Luke on his mission to research the life of Jesus as he travels through Galilee and Judea, finding and interviewing people who knew the Savior.
Further, I focused on those 17 parables and tried to imagine which people might have had a reason to remember Jesus telling them--the circumstances, events, or locations. For example, could it be that Mary and Martha of Bethany remembered the story of Lazarus and the rich man precisely because their brother was named Lazarus?
Both Luke and Acts consistently portray Roman centurions in a very positive light. Could it be that Luke talked to one who recognized Jesus as the Son of God?
How about those two people who were walking to Emmaus after the Resurrection? Any chance one of them was one of the women who followed Jesus and talked to Luke years later?
It's possible that Mary was still living while Luke did his research. Did he get the details about the visitation of the angel Gabriel from the one person who was there?
You get the idea. Pure speculation and imagination. Taking "poetic license" to the extreme, I was also able to make up stuff about Mary Magdalene. You see, I think she was one of Jesus' inner circle; certainly all four Gospels say that she of all people was the first to see the risen Christ. What a woman! What was her real story? What happened to her after Jesus ascended?
Well, I got the book all written way back in the mid-1990s. When I was in Seminary, every time I had a reason to do a research paper, I'd try to link it in to my study of Luke. Even my master's thesis, God-Fearers in the First Century, was all about the Gentiles who embraced Judaism, and in some cases, Christianity. In a class with the very learned Dr. Darrell Bock, who has written extensively on Luke, I first heard his opinion that Luke may have been a God-Fearer.
I have revised the book a time or two. In my creative writing class at DTS, I listened to my eminent professor Reg Grant's suggestions and adhered to some of them. It's a better book than it was before.
I never have come up with a great name for my novel. "Luke's Story" is the best I can come up with. Lame, but accurate.
I've tried to get it published a time or two, but that's always been an exercise in futility. I think it's pretty good, but the path to publication is long, dreary, difficult, and more time-consuming and frustrating than I've ever been able to stand.
"Publishing my novel" is on my bucket list. I guess I'd better start ramping up again. Any suggestions, kindly Reader?
In any event, I hope you can read Luke and Acts with the idea of the researcher behind the writing. Oh, and one more thing. Luke was probably a Greek, a Gentile, the only non-Jew to write a Gospel. He evidently became a believing Christian, and his accounts reverberate with the joy of salvation that Christ made available to all people.
Luke, however, resonates with me in a different way. I guess I've always been captivated by the author. The Book of Luke, and its sequel, Acts, are attributed to a doctor who accompanied Paul on some of his missionary journeys. The introduction to both Luke and Acts state that the author did extensive research, including interviews with eyewitnesses. His purpose was to write an orderly account so that Theophilus, whoever that might have been, might "know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed" (Luke 1:4).
Not much is known about Luke. He was probably Greek, well-educated, perhaps a former slave. It appears that he may have first met Paul in Syrian Antioch. After that, pretty much everything else is speculation.
Many years ago, I became fascinated with the idea of how and why Dr. Luke went about researching and writing this account of Jesus. As I studied it more closely, I learned that there are several wonderful sections that are unique to Luke: For example, the whole birth narrative, including the stories about Elizabeth, Zachariah and John as well as the annunciation of the birth to Mary, are only found in Luke. Mark has a little bit of birth narrative that dovetails with Luke's information.
Or, there are some 17 parables that are found only in Luke--The Prodigal Son, the Lost Coin, Lazarus and the Rich Man, etc.
One thought is that Luke used the works of Mark and Matthew but supplemented them with his own research. In particular, he may have had exclusive interviews with people who knew Jesus. There's another matter. Maybe Luke wrote his books at the request of Theophilus. But somewhere I read a theory that Luke wrote the account of Jesus to be sort of a legal brief for Paul when he went to trial in Rome. I love that!
Fascination turned to obsession for me. And obsession turned into my unpublished novel. I took the idea of a friendship between Paul and Luke, the need to prepare an orderly account about Jesus, and the evidence that Luke did eyewitness interviews and fleshed out a tale. It's written in the first person, through Luke's eyes, and is organized around a journey from Antioch, on the missionary journeys, and then to Caesarea, where Paul was imprisoned. After that, the story follows Luke on his mission to research the life of Jesus as he travels through Galilee and Judea, finding and interviewing people who knew the Savior.
Further, I focused on those 17 parables and tried to imagine which people might have had a reason to remember Jesus telling them--the circumstances, events, or locations. For example, could it be that Mary and Martha of Bethany remembered the story of Lazarus and the rich man precisely because their brother was named Lazarus?
Both Luke and Acts consistently portray Roman centurions in a very positive light. Could it be that Luke talked to one who recognized Jesus as the Son of God?
How about those two people who were walking to Emmaus after the Resurrection? Any chance one of them was one of the women who followed Jesus and talked to Luke years later?
It's possible that Mary was still living while Luke did his research. Did he get the details about the visitation of the angel Gabriel from the one person who was there?
You get the idea. Pure speculation and imagination. Taking "poetic license" to the extreme, I was also able to make up stuff about Mary Magdalene. You see, I think she was one of Jesus' inner circle; certainly all four Gospels say that she of all people was the first to see the risen Christ. What a woman! What was her real story? What happened to her after Jesus ascended?
Well, I got the book all written way back in the mid-1990s. When I was in Seminary, every time I had a reason to do a research paper, I'd try to link it in to my study of Luke. Even my master's thesis, God-Fearers in the First Century, was all about the Gentiles who embraced Judaism, and in some cases, Christianity. In a class with the very learned Dr. Darrell Bock, who has written extensively on Luke, I first heard his opinion that Luke may have been a God-Fearer.
I have revised the book a time or two. In my creative writing class at DTS, I listened to my eminent professor Reg Grant's suggestions and adhered to some of them. It's a better book than it was before.
I never have come up with a great name for my novel. "Luke's Story" is the best I can come up with. Lame, but accurate.
I've tried to get it published a time or two, but that's always been an exercise in futility. I think it's pretty good, but the path to publication is long, dreary, difficult, and more time-consuming and frustrating than I've ever been able to stand.
"Publishing my novel" is on my bucket list. I guess I'd better start ramping up again. Any suggestions, kindly Reader?
In any event, I hope you can read Luke and Acts with the idea of the researcher behind the writing. Oh, and one more thing. Luke was probably a Greek, a Gentile, the only non-Jew to write a Gospel. He evidently became a believing Christian, and his accounts reverberate with the joy of salvation that Christ made available to all people.
Friday, September 7, 2012
Leviticus: How much is still relevant?
When I was in seminary (Dallas Theological Seminary), I had a class assignment to outline the book of Leviticus. Once, I taught a unit on Leviticus and Numbers to one of my Sunday School classes. And I've also dug into passages of Leviticus as part of a study on the Jewish feasts.
Every time I've taken the time to carefully study Leviticus, armed with good commentaries, it has been a pleasurable and enlightening experience. I know a woman who was advised by her spiritual mentor to actually write out all of Leviticus, word by word. It took her some months, but she reported that it was a transformational experience. No doubt.
For this read-through, I didn't do any of these thorough, thoughtful ways of absorbing Leviticus. Instead, I did what many people do who end up abandoning their read-through-the-Bible goals. I just read through it straight. As it happened, my husband, John, and I were on a road trip, so I read it out loud to him.
I can't say I recommend this method, but we did have some interesting thoughts and discussions. So much of what's in Leviticus is completely arcane. For example, no one has actually slaughtered animals at the Tent of Meeting or the Temple since the first century A.D. when the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed.
We read long passages about how priests are to deal with skin diseases or "infections" ("mildew" in some translations) in a house or on fabric or leather. We happened to be at my mother-in-law's home when we got to chapter 18 about unlawful sexual relations. Believe me--reading those passages out loud was deeply uncomfortable!
This is the book that goes on and on about clean and unclean animals: You can eat locusts, but you can't eat shell fish. You're not supposed to plant your field with two kinds of seed or wear clothing with two kinds of material.
"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD" (Lev. 19:18-19)
"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife...both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death" (Lev. 20:10). And of course, everyone's favorite, "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death" (Lev. 20:13). NB: "Put to death." Really?
So reading through Leviticus--for the thoughtful, Bible-revering believer--makes you stop and think hard. Which of these laws should still be observed, and which are too outmoded? Why? How do you decide? Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets: I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished" (Matthew 5:17-18). What does that mean?
All of this raises more questions than it answers. In my humble opinion, I don't think anyone should be very dogmatic about interpreting and applying Leviticus. It's too easy to start cherry-picking what to observe and what to ignore, based on one's own preferences (or sinful choices).
I think we can, however, agree on a couple of principles. First, God did and does care about the minutiae of our lives. We honor or disobey Him in even the smallest details of what we do or don't do. Second, God has high and sometimes unfathomable standards for His people. We may not always understand His commands; we don't necessarily have to understand.
Third, there is no way anyone then or now could observe and obey all of God's standards, although we are obliged to do our best. The sacrifices described in Leviticus were the means for the ancient Jews to atone for their sins--intentional or unintentional. Humans simply are unable to live up to God's standards for holiness.
And that, friends, is why we need our Savior. The book of Hebrews speaks directly to Leviticus when it explains how Christ died once and for all to take away the sins of many people. "We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all" (Hebrews 10:10).
If you're reading Leviticus, I hope you have a good commentary and some time on your hands to ruminate on the meaning and intention of this book for the people of ancient Israel and for modern people today.
Every time I've taken the time to carefully study Leviticus, armed with good commentaries, it has been a pleasurable and enlightening experience. I know a woman who was advised by her spiritual mentor to actually write out all of Leviticus, word by word. It took her some months, but she reported that it was a transformational experience. No doubt.
For this read-through, I didn't do any of these thorough, thoughtful ways of absorbing Leviticus. Instead, I did what many people do who end up abandoning their read-through-the-Bible goals. I just read through it straight. As it happened, my husband, John, and I were on a road trip, so I read it out loud to him.
I can't say I recommend this method, but we did have some interesting thoughts and discussions. So much of what's in Leviticus is completely arcane. For example, no one has actually slaughtered animals at the Tent of Meeting or the Temple since the first century A.D. when the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed.
We read long passages about how priests are to deal with skin diseases or "infections" ("mildew" in some translations) in a house or on fabric or leather. We happened to be at my mother-in-law's home when we got to chapter 18 about unlawful sexual relations. Believe me--reading those passages out loud was deeply uncomfortable!
This is the book that goes on and on about clean and unclean animals: You can eat locusts, but you can't eat shell fish. You're not supposed to plant your field with two kinds of seed or wear clothing with two kinds of material.
"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD" (Lev. 19:18-19)
"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife...both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death" (Lev. 20:10). And of course, everyone's favorite, "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death" (Lev. 20:13). NB: "Put to death." Really?
So reading through Leviticus--for the thoughtful, Bible-revering believer--makes you stop and think hard. Which of these laws should still be observed, and which are too outmoded? Why? How do you decide? Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets: I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished" (Matthew 5:17-18). What does that mean?
All of this raises more questions than it answers. In my humble opinion, I don't think anyone should be very dogmatic about interpreting and applying Leviticus. It's too easy to start cherry-picking what to observe and what to ignore, based on one's own preferences (or sinful choices).
I think we can, however, agree on a couple of principles. First, God did and does care about the minutiae of our lives. We honor or disobey Him in even the smallest details of what we do or don't do. Second, God has high and sometimes unfathomable standards for His people. We may not always understand His commands; we don't necessarily have to understand.
Third, there is no way anyone then or now could observe and obey all of God's standards, although we are obliged to do our best. The sacrifices described in Leviticus were the means for the ancient Jews to atone for their sins--intentional or unintentional. Humans simply are unable to live up to God's standards for holiness.
And that, friends, is why we need our Savior. The book of Hebrews speaks directly to Leviticus when it explains how Christ died once and for all to take away the sins of many people. "We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all" (Hebrews 10:10).
If you're reading Leviticus, I hope you have a good commentary and some time on your hands to ruminate on the meaning and intention of this book for the people of ancient Israel and for modern people today.
Lamentations: Great Is Thy Faithfulness
Lamentations is the book attributed to Jeremiah that expresses the prophet's emotions--and those of the people of Israel--following the collapse of the nation in 586 B.C. and the Exile. As the title implies, it is one long lament.
I did not make a careful, analytical study of Lamentations. I'm thinking it deserves such a treatment because I think it is richer in meaning and structure than just a straight reading will reveal. (Hey, Kehila Sunday School Class: This might be a good choice for an upcoming study!)
Most of Lamentations is pretty grim. It is the picture of woe, devastation, and regret. Some of the descriptions of the siege of Jerusalem are horrifying (as in mothers having to eat their children).
I marked a couple of passages that deal with the causes of the demise of Israel: 3:34-36 and 4:12-13. These passages pinpoint the injustices of the people, the arrogance of kings, and the iniquity of the religious leaders.
Yet, as woeful as the book is, right in the middle are some beautiful, hopeful passages. One of Christendom's favorite hymns, "Great Is Thy Faithfulness," comes from 3:22-24:
"Because of the LORD's great love, we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail. They are new every morning: great is your faithfulness. I say to myself, 'The LORD is my portion; therefore I will wait for Him.'"
And a little later, "For men are not cast off by the Lord forever. Though He brings grief, He will show compassion, so great is His unfailing love. For He does not willingly bring affliction or grief to the children of men" (3:31-33).
If you like Hebrew poetry, with its evocative imagery and its graceful parallelism, Lamentations is a tour de force. It's message of hope is twofold. First, God is just and righteous: He does indeed follow through on punishing wickedness. Second, God is faithful and accessible in our deepest distress. Great is His faithfulness; morning by morning, new mercies we see.
I did not make a careful, analytical study of Lamentations. I'm thinking it deserves such a treatment because I think it is richer in meaning and structure than just a straight reading will reveal. (Hey, Kehila Sunday School Class: This might be a good choice for an upcoming study!)
Most of Lamentations is pretty grim. It is the picture of woe, devastation, and regret. Some of the descriptions of the siege of Jerusalem are horrifying (as in mothers having to eat their children).
I marked a couple of passages that deal with the causes of the demise of Israel: 3:34-36 and 4:12-13. These passages pinpoint the injustices of the people, the arrogance of kings, and the iniquity of the religious leaders.
Yet, as woeful as the book is, right in the middle are some beautiful, hopeful passages. One of Christendom's favorite hymns, "Great Is Thy Faithfulness," comes from 3:22-24:
"Because of the LORD's great love, we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail. They are new every morning: great is your faithfulness. I say to myself, 'The LORD is my portion; therefore I will wait for Him.'"
And a little later, "For men are not cast off by the Lord forever. Though He brings grief, He will show compassion, so great is His unfailing love. For He does not willingly bring affliction or grief to the children of men" (3:31-33).
If you like Hebrew poetry, with its evocative imagery and its graceful parallelism, Lamentations is a tour de force. It's message of hope is twofold. First, God is just and righteous: He does indeed follow through on punishing wickedness. Second, God is faithful and accessible in our deepest distress. Great is His faithfulness; morning by morning, new mercies we see.
Friday, August 24, 2012
1 & 2 Kings: The end of the train wreck
Even though it's got some great stories and is rather interesting historical reading, 1 and 2 Kings is kind of long and dreary. It's the account of the decline and fall of Israel, and it's a little like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
According to the Deuteronomistic History theory, it's the final part of the corpus that starts with Joshua, or possibly Deuteronomy, that explains why God's Chosen Nation of Israel ended up conquered first by the Assyrians and then by the Babylonians.
And the reason is pretty straightforward. Over and over and over, it says that so-and-so "did evil in the eyes of the LORD," which meant they did not worship Yahweh solely, exclusively, whole-heartedly.
I noted chapters 16 and 17 of 2 Kings the other day when I was reading. These went into great detail about the apostasy, how some of the later kings deliberately added in worship rites and objects that came from pagan civilizations. In chapter 16, it was because king Ahaz of Judah was trying to curry favor with Tiglath-Pilesar of Assyria. In chapter 17, it was a broader indictment of all of Israel, which was only slightly more apostate than Judah.
I got to thinking about how the Bible rails again and again about worship practices, that is, worshiping false gods of other nations. I've wondered in this blog before about which "gods" or idols people of our time worship rather than the Creator we recognize in the Bible.
Another thing the Bible rails about again and again is social injustice--neglecting the poor, the widowed, the orphaned. Also, unethical business and judicial practices are frequently in the crosshairs.
Ya know what the Bible doesn't rail on and on about? Homosexuality. Yes, there are a handful of passages that seem to condemn it--but there are lots more that condemn adultery of any kind. And of course, everyone knows what Jesus said about homosexuality.
Okay. I came out of the closet. I'm conflicted about an issue that just doesn't seem that cut-and-dried to me, based on how I read the Bible.
Mark Twain once said, "It's not those parts of the Bible I don't understand that scare me — it's the parts I do understand.” I interpret that to mean that each of us has enough on our plate doing what the Bible tells us clearly. I, for one, don't have much patience with people who are so sure of their righteousness that they can rail against less obvious principles.
Well. I'm glad I got that off my chest. And perhaps at some point God will show me that my ambivalence on this topic is tantamount to the apostasy of the nation of Israel during the era of the divided kingdom. I actually ask Him pretty often to make it clear to me and to show me where I'm being stiff-necked.
Meanwhile, I'm going to keep reading my Bible slowly, deliberately, in alphabetical order. Hopefully, this will help keep me from my own slo-mo train wreck.
According to the Deuteronomistic History theory, it's the final part of the corpus that starts with Joshua, or possibly Deuteronomy, that explains why God's Chosen Nation of Israel ended up conquered first by the Assyrians and then by the Babylonians.
And the reason is pretty straightforward. Over and over and over, it says that so-and-so "did evil in the eyes of the LORD," which meant they did not worship Yahweh solely, exclusively, whole-heartedly.
I noted chapters 16 and 17 of 2 Kings the other day when I was reading. These went into great detail about the apostasy, how some of the later kings deliberately added in worship rites and objects that came from pagan civilizations. In chapter 16, it was because king Ahaz of Judah was trying to curry favor with Tiglath-Pilesar of Assyria. In chapter 17, it was a broader indictment of all of Israel, which was only slightly more apostate than Judah.
I got to thinking about how the Bible rails again and again about worship practices, that is, worshiping false gods of other nations. I've wondered in this blog before about which "gods" or idols people of our time worship rather than the Creator we recognize in the Bible.
Another thing the Bible rails about again and again is social injustice--neglecting the poor, the widowed, the orphaned. Also, unethical business and judicial practices are frequently in the crosshairs.
Ya know what the Bible doesn't rail on and on about? Homosexuality. Yes, there are a handful of passages that seem to condemn it--but there are lots more that condemn adultery of any kind. And of course, everyone knows what Jesus said about homosexuality.
Okay. I came out of the closet. I'm conflicted about an issue that just doesn't seem that cut-and-dried to me, based on how I read the Bible.
Mark Twain once said, "It's not those parts of the Bible I don't understand that scare me — it's the parts I do understand.” I interpret that to mean that each of us has enough on our plate doing what the Bible tells us clearly. I, for one, don't have much patience with people who are so sure of their righteousness that they can rail against less obvious principles.
Well. I'm glad I got that off my chest. And perhaps at some point God will show me that my ambivalence on this topic is tantamount to the apostasy of the nation of Israel during the era of the divided kingdom. I actually ask Him pretty often to make it clear to me and to show me where I'm being stiff-necked.
Meanwhile, I'm going to keep reading my Bible slowly, deliberately, in alphabetical order. Hopefully, this will help keep me from my own slo-mo train wreck.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Judges: Not for the faint of heart
I guess it's not good to say you have a particular favorite book of the Bible. Perhaps we should comment about them as we do our children. That is, we love all of them; just in different ways.
Well, I suppose I do love Judges differently than I love, say, Luke or James or Ruth. But I really do love Judges a lot.
It has some of the most engrossing stories in the whole Bible. Probably everyone is familiar with the stories of Samson, especially the "Samson, Delilah, and the Fateful Haircut" story. If you've been in Bible study classes for a while, you may know about Gideon and his incredible conquest of the Midianites.
If you have kind of a feminist proclivity, you may know about Deborah, who was not only a prophetess, but also a pretty effective judge, military leader, and poet. Or her co-heroine Jael who wielded a tent peg and hammer to the gory demise of an enemy general.
One of my favorite stories is about Ehud who pretty much eviscerated Eglon, king of the Moabites, who was "a very fat man."
I have had the good fortune to be able to teach the book of Judges three or four times, and it's always fun and exhilarating. I was also extremely fortunate to have the opportunity to study Judges in a Hebrew class at Dallas Seminary as well as in an Old Testament history class. Those seminary classes helped me see stuff in Judges that I think it's easy to miss if you're just breezing through the book.
Namely, the story of Judges is a chilling, horrifying look at the downward spiral of the moral character of the Israelites following the death of Joshua. There are a couple of places where the author of Judges clearly lays out what happened. "Then the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD and served the Baals [that is, foreign gods]. They forsook the LORD, the God of their fathers who had brought them out of Egypt....In His anger against Israel the LORD handed them over to raiders who plundered them...Whenever Israel went out to fight, the hand of the LORD was against them to defeat them, just as He had sworn to them. They were in great distress. Then the LORD raised up judges who saved them out of the hands of these raiders. Yet they would not listen to their judges but prostituted themselves to other gods and worshiped them....They refused to give up their evil practices and stubborn ways" (Judges 2:11-12, 15-17, 19).
So the book is a carefully crafted narrative, not necessarily in chronological order, designed to illustrate the increasing corruption. A closer examination of some of the more prominent judges, Gideon and Samson, reveals that they were hugely flawed characters, just barely loyal to Yahweh. Nevertheless, God used them to rescue His people. It says much more about Yahweh's compassion and faithfulness than it does about the "heroism" of those judges.
Then there's Jephthah, who was filled with the Spirit to allow him to fight the Ammonites. But he ended up sacrificing his only daughter to fulfill a rash and unnecessary bargain he'd made with God.
Even worse, there's Micah from the hill country who paid to have his own pet priest. Worst of all is the Levite who let his concubine be gang-raped--and probably but not definitely murdered--then chopped up her body and sent the parts to other Israelite clans as a call to arms. The final section is about a civil war that nearly wiped out the whole tribe of Benjamin. Only by kidnapping girls to be wives to the remaining Benjamites were they able to prevent the tribe's demise. Charming.
The stories are colorful and compelling. I also just love the way the book is constructed. It's supposedly part of that Deuteronomistic History that seems to build the case of why Israel was eventually sent into Exile. Also, it sets the stage beautifully for the stories about Saul, David, and the following kings of Israel. In fact, the last line of Judges is "In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit" (Judges 21:22).
Frankly, Judges is not for the faint-hearted. There's a lot of activity in it that's violent and offensive. If you're going to read it, and as you might guess, I really recommend that you do, try to find a great study Bible or commentary. Take the time to understand what's going on and ask the questions of "Why would this person act this way?" It's often not a very flattering answer.
Well, I suppose I do love Judges differently than I love, say, Luke or James or Ruth. But I really do love Judges a lot.
It has some of the most engrossing stories in the whole Bible. Probably everyone is familiar with the stories of Samson, especially the "Samson, Delilah, and the Fateful Haircut" story. If you've been in Bible study classes for a while, you may know about Gideon and his incredible conquest of the Midianites.
If you have kind of a feminist proclivity, you may know about Deborah, who was not only a prophetess, but also a pretty effective judge, military leader, and poet. Or her co-heroine Jael who wielded a tent peg and hammer to the gory demise of an enemy general.
One of my favorite stories is about Ehud who pretty much eviscerated Eglon, king of the Moabites, who was "a very fat man."
I have had the good fortune to be able to teach the book of Judges three or four times, and it's always fun and exhilarating. I was also extremely fortunate to have the opportunity to study Judges in a Hebrew class at Dallas Seminary as well as in an Old Testament history class. Those seminary classes helped me see stuff in Judges that I think it's easy to miss if you're just breezing through the book.
Namely, the story of Judges is a chilling, horrifying look at the downward spiral of the moral character of the Israelites following the death of Joshua. There are a couple of places where the author of Judges clearly lays out what happened. "Then the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD and served the Baals [that is, foreign gods]. They forsook the LORD, the God of their fathers who had brought them out of Egypt....In His anger against Israel the LORD handed them over to raiders who plundered them...Whenever Israel went out to fight, the hand of the LORD was against them to defeat them, just as He had sworn to them. They were in great distress. Then the LORD raised up judges who saved them out of the hands of these raiders. Yet they would not listen to their judges but prostituted themselves to other gods and worshiped them....They refused to give up their evil practices and stubborn ways" (Judges 2:11-12, 15-17, 19).
So the book is a carefully crafted narrative, not necessarily in chronological order, designed to illustrate the increasing corruption. A closer examination of some of the more prominent judges, Gideon and Samson, reveals that they were hugely flawed characters, just barely loyal to Yahweh. Nevertheless, God used them to rescue His people. It says much more about Yahweh's compassion and faithfulness than it does about the "heroism" of those judges.
Then there's Jephthah, who was filled with the Spirit to allow him to fight the Ammonites. But he ended up sacrificing his only daughter to fulfill a rash and unnecessary bargain he'd made with God.
Even worse, there's Micah from the hill country who paid to have his own pet priest. Worst of all is the Levite who let his concubine be gang-raped--and probably but not definitely murdered--then chopped up her body and sent the parts to other Israelite clans as a call to arms. The final section is about a civil war that nearly wiped out the whole tribe of Benjamin. Only by kidnapping girls to be wives to the remaining Benjamites were they able to prevent the tribe's demise. Charming.
The stories are colorful and compelling. I also just love the way the book is constructed. It's supposedly part of that Deuteronomistic History that seems to build the case of why Israel was eventually sent into Exile. Also, it sets the stage beautifully for the stories about Saul, David, and the following kings of Israel. In fact, the last line of Judges is "In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit" (Judges 21:22).
Frankly, Judges is not for the faint-hearted. There's a lot of activity in it that's violent and offensive. If you're going to read it, and as you might guess, I really recommend that you do, try to find a great study Bible or commentary. Take the time to understand what's going on and ask the questions of "Why would this person act this way?" It's often not a very flattering answer.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Joshua: DH Part One
If you've been reading my blog entries (and I'm not kidding myself that more than one or two or you actually are) you may be waiting for me to say one of the books of the Bible is NOT one of my favorites. Well, here I go: Joshua is not a fave.
One thing I kind of like about Joshua is that it's the first (possibly second) book in what they call the Deuteronomistic History, or DH. That is, it is the first part of the ongoing narrative about the Chosen People and how they increasingly wandered from their original covenant relationship with God. The narrative winds up at the end of 2 Kings with the destruction of Israel, the Exile, and only a promise of the Restoration. So, it's interesting to read Joshua while observing the hints of the future downfall.
There are a couple of great stories: Joshua and the Battle of Jericho (when the walls came tumblin' down); the destruction of Achan, after he sneaked some plunder that should have been destroyed; the sun standing still while the Israelites fought the battle at Gibeon.
But a lot of it is about the division of the land among the tribes. Yawn. Sorry.
I do have to say, however, that this was the first time I paid much attention to those passages that describe the boundaries and cities of the territories. I guess our Sunday school class study of 1 and 2 Samuel has made me more sensitive to some of those locations because of the way David and Saul maneuvered throughout the territory. This just goes to show that the more one studies the Bible, the more interesting it becomes. Right, Gentle Reader? Are you finding that true for yourself?
The best verse in Joshua is the famous 24:14-15. It's part of Joshua's farewell speech and charge to the people: "Now fear the LORD and serve Him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your forefathers worshiped beyond the River [that is, back on the other side of the Euphrates in Abraham's day] and in Egypt and serve the LORD. But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."
Gives me chills; wish I could have been there for that speech.
One thing I like about that passage is that it really emphasizes the part that choice and decision have in people's faith. Religion, any flavor, requires some kind of leap of faith. Religious tenets are difficult to believe because they typically defy rationality and empirical evidence. For Jews, it would have been a leap of faith to believe in one invisible God, or that sacrificing a bull would be pleasing to Him. For Christians, it takes a leap of faith to believe that a man could be born of the Holy Spirit, change water into wine, walk on water, etc., etc., and rise from the dead. Those things just don't happen in our normal experience. Believing they did happen in the person of Jesus Christ--God Incarnate, if you please--is ipso facto faith.
I think there's kind of a qualitative difference, too, in what Joshua instructed his people--to choose which god they would serve--versus the teaching of Jesus: "He who believes in me will not perish." In one way, Joshua called his people to serve through a deeds-oriented religion calling for obedience and tangible sacrifice. Christianity, however, is in some ways more of a faith-oriented religion that depends on the law "written on their hearts" (Jeremiah 31:33). But let me not push that distinction too far. I think that what God really wanted from the ancient Jews--as well as from modern-day Jews, Christians, and anyone else--is wholehearted devotion and surrendered faith as demonstrated by moral living and compassion for other people.
One thing I kind of like about Joshua is that it's the first (possibly second) book in what they call the Deuteronomistic History, or DH. That is, it is the first part of the ongoing narrative about the Chosen People and how they increasingly wandered from their original covenant relationship with God. The narrative winds up at the end of 2 Kings with the destruction of Israel, the Exile, and only a promise of the Restoration. So, it's interesting to read Joshua while observing the hints of the future downfall.
There are a couple of great stories: Joshua and the Battle of Jericho (when the walls came tumblin' down); the destruction of Achan, after he sneaked some plunder that should have been destroyed; the sun standing still while the Israelites fought the battle at Gibeon.
But a lot of it is about the division of the land among the tribes. Yawn. Sorry.
I do have to say, however, that this was the first time I paid much attention to those passages that describe the boundaries and cities of the territories. I guess our Sunday school class study of 1 and 2 Samuel has made me more sensitive to some of those locations because of the way David and Saul maneuvered throughout the territory. This just goes to show that the more one studies the Bible, the more interesting it becomes. Right, Gentle Reader? Are you finding that true for yourself?
The best verse in Joshua is the famous 24:14-15. It's part of Joshua's farewell speech and charge to the people: "Now fear the LORD and serve Him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your forefathers worshiped beyond the River [that is, back on the other side of the Euphrates in Abraham's day] and in Egypt and serve the LORD. But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."
Gives me chills; wish I could have been there for that speech.
One thing I like about that passage is that it really emphasizes the part that choice and decision have in people's faith. Religion, any flavor, requires some kind of leap of faith. Religious tenets are difficult to believe because they typically defy rationality and empirical evidence. For Jews, it would have been a leap of faith to believe in one invisible God, or that sacrificing a bull would be pleasing to Him. For Christians, it takes a leap of faith to believe that a man could be born of the Holy Spirit, change water into wine, walk on water, etc., etc., and rise from the dead. Those things just don't happen in our normal experience. Believing they did happen in the person of Jesus Christ--God Incarnate, if you please--is ipso facto faith.
I think there's kind of a qualitative difference, too, in what Joshua instructed his people--to choose which god they would serve--versus the teaching of Jesus: "He who believes in me will not perish." In one way, Joshua called his people to serve through a deeds-oriented religion calling for obedience and tangible sacrifice. Christianity, however, is in some ways more of a faith-oriented religion that depends on the law "written on their hearts" (Jeremiah 31:33). But let me not push that distinction too far. I think that what God really wanted from the ancient Jews--as well as from modern-day Jews, Christians, and anyone else--is wholehearted devotion and surrendered faith as demonstrated by moral living and compassion for other people.
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Jonah: Beyond the fish tale
Oh, I love me some Jonah.
We studied Jonah in my second semester of Hebrew, so it was great to work through it verse by verse, nuance by nuance. I've also trotted it out as a Bible study lesson many times. It's just loaded with wisdom.
What's not to love about this wonderfully constructed tale of a reluctant prophet and that bodacious fish? And it's fun to watch skeptics of the Bible go nuts as they deal with that fish thing. As if believing some kind of great fish swallowing then vomiting Jonah is the litmus test of faith. Ha.
What caught my attention this time reading Jonah is the way God deals with the non-believers in the story. We see the sailors, who realize there's something kind of (sorry) fishy about Jonah, turn to worship Yahweh as they see how He controls the wind, waves, and storm.
Then, there are the people of Nineveh, who were supposedly the baddest group of heathens in Mesopotamia at the time. They received one short, terse message from Jonah ("Forty days more and Nineveh will be overturned") and they repented. That is, they took God and this message seriously and everyone from the king on down to the cattle put on sackcloth, and gave up their evil and violent ways. That's it! They didn't seem to overhaul their state religion and tear down their temples. But because they repented sincerely, God relented and did not destroy them in the 40 day time period.
Friends, how easy it is to repent and receive God's forgiveness.
Now, history shows that the Ninevites didn't stay "converted" very long. They came back as the Assyrians and conquered Israel in brutal fashion. But for a while, they behaved.
The behavior, obedience and salvation of the Ninevites stands in stark contrast to the snarly, recalcitrant Jonah who just wanted to see them wiped off the face of the earth. The compliance of the people of Nineveh also stands in stark contrast to the people of Israel who were continuously reluctant and stubborn about being obedient and faithful to Yahweh.
A couple of other points from Jonah:
That big fish was pretty darn scary, but it was God's means of rescuing Jonah from certain death by drowning. I think the fish metaphor suggests that God sometimes puts very scary things in our path as a way of saving us from spiritual peril.
I have to wonder what Jonah expected to see when he went out on the hillside to watch what would happen to Nineveh. I'm pretty sure he was hoping to see fire and brimstone rain down on the wicked city. After all, the whole reason he tried to run away from his command to go preach was because he feared God would indeed refrain from blowing up the Ninevites. Jonah and God talk about that in the final scene of the book.
But God has the last word. He gently points out Jonah's self-involvement and contrasts with His own heart for the lost world. "But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left [i.e., cannot discern God's truth] and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that city?"
See my blog post about 1 John, which I wrote earlier today. The book of Jonah, ancient as it is, carries the same message as John's writings: God is Love, and God's people are commanded to love one another.
We studied Jonah in my second semester of Hebrew, so it was great to work through it verse by verse, nuance by nuance. I've also trotted it out as a Bible study lesson many times. It's just loaded with wisdom.
What's not to love about this wonderfully constructed tale of a reluctant prophet and that bodacious fish? And it's fun to watch skeptics of the Bible go nuts as they deal with that fish thing. As if believing some kind of great fish swallowing then vomiting Jonah is the litmus test of faith. Ha.
What caught my attention this time reading Jonah is the way God deals with the non-believers in the story. We see the sailors, who realize there's something kind of (sorry) fishy about Jonah, turn to worship Yahweh as they see how He controls the wind, waves, and storm.
Then, there are the people of Nineveh, who were supposedly the baddest group of heathens in Mesopotamia at the time. They received one short, terse message from Jonah ("Forty days more and Nineveh will be overturned") and they repented. That is, they took God and this message seriously and everyone from the king on down to the cattle put on sackcloth, and gave up their evil and violent ways. That's it! They didn't seem to overhaul their state religion and tear down their temples. But because they repented sincerely, God relented and did not destroy them in the 40 day time period.
Friends, how easy it is to repent and receive God's forgiveness.
Now, history shows that the Ninevites didn't stay "converted" very long. They came back as the Assyrians and conquered Israel in brutal fashion. But for a while, they behaved.
The behavior, obedience and salvation of the Ninevites stands in stark contrast to the snarly, recalcitrant Jonah who just wanted to see them wiped off the face of the earth. The compliance of the people of Nineveh also stands in stark contrast to the people of Israel who were continuously reluctant and stubborn about being obedient and faithful to Yahweh.
A couple of other points from Jonah:
That big fish was pretty darn scary, but it was God's means of rescuing Jonah from certain death by drowning. I think the fish metaphor suggests that God sometimes puts very scary things in our path as a way of saving us from spiritual peril.
I have to wonder what Jonah expected to see when he went out on the hillside to watch what would happen to Nineveh. I'm pretty sure he was hoping to see fire and brimstone rain down on the wicked city. After all, the whole reason he tried to run away from his command to go preach was because he feared God would indeed refrain from blowing up the Ninevites. Jonah and God talk about that in the final scene of the book.
But God has the last word. He gently points out Jonah's self-involvement and contrasts with His own heart for the lost world. "But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left [i.e., cannot discern God's truth] and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that city?"
See my blog post about 1 John, which I wrote earlier today. The book of Jonah, ancient as it is, carries the same message as John's writings: God is Love, and God's people are commanded to love one another.
Jude: Encouragement for Discernment
Jude does not immediately follow 3 John in alphabetical order. However, since it has so much in common with the shortes epistle attributed to John, it is almost always grouped with it.
The book of Jude is revered largely because of its author who tells us he is the brother of James (the leader of the Christian church in Jerusalem) and the bondslave of Jesus. James and Jesus were brothers, so Jude would be a brother of Jesus, too.
Jude's message is a warning against so-called "Christians" who reveled in sinful behavior because they thought salvation gave them license to sin. This sentiment was characteristic of some of the Gnostics; apparently some of the early Gnostics were plaguing Jude's readers as much as they were plaguing John's. Again: it's amazing how quickly divisions sprang up in the early Christian community.
The warnings against teaching bad interpretations of Christ's gospel are dire, as Jude points out. Modern-day Christians, including myself, should take this to heart. We must be on our guard to discern right and wrong in preaching and other "religious" communication. We must strive to perceive the truth as we evaluate the words and deeds of others. As I write this, I'm thinking about the issues of homosexuality (e.g., gay marriage), and even the Mormon religion. I struggle daily trying to figure out what's "right" according to the letter and spirit of Christ's teaching.
The last two verses of Jude are helpful and encouraging in this struggle:
To Him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before His glorious presence without fault and with great joy -- to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore.
Amen.
The book of Jude is revered largely because of its author who tells us he is the brother of James (the leader of the Christian church in Jerusalem) and the bondslave of Jesus. James and Jesus were brothers, so Jude would be a brother of Jesus, too.
Jude's message is a warning against so-called "Christians" who reveled in sinful behavior because they thought salvation gave them license to sin. This sentiment was characteristic of some of the Gnostics; apparently some of the early Gnostics were plaguing Jude's readers as much as they were plaguing John's. Again: it's amazing how quickly divisions sprang up in the early Christian community.
The warnings against teaching bad interpretations of Christ's gospel are dire, as Jude points out. Modern-day Christians, including myself, should take this to heart. We must be on our guard to discern right and wrong in preaching and other "religious" communication. We must strive to perceive the truth as we evaluate the words and deeds of others. As I write this, I'm thinking about the issues of homosexuality (e.g., gay marriage), and even the Mormon religion. I struggle daily trying to figure out what's "right" according to the letter and spirit of Christ's teaching.
The last two verses of Jude are helpful and encouraging in this struggle:
To Him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before His glorious presence without fault and with great joy -- to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore.
Amen.
1,2,3 John: Short, Sweet and Timely
First, Second, and Third John are so short, they just naturally get grouped together. I will group them in this brief blog post as well.
This time, I read them in my Greek-English diglot. That just means I read them in English but I could quickly refer to the Greek when I felt like it. This process made me more aware than ever of the similarities between 1 John and the Gospel of John.
1 John is, I think, known as the "Love Book." The word "love," or "agape" in Greek, is used about a zillion times. (I know, Greek students, I could easily look up the exact number of uses with one of my Bible tools, but I'm too lazy.)
One can't walk away from reading 1 John without some soul-searching on how seriously "we" take Jesus' commands to love one another. More often, we judge one another. We disdain one another. We are suspicious of one another. We get caught up in one another's life style or other choices. We love our neighbor very much less than we love ourself.
Really: What would happen if all of us in this highly charged election year started from a position of loving others? What if we were able to look past people's words, deeds, political convictions, moral choices, sexual orientation, etc., etc. and just begin by loving them? Would it cut down on the ideological standoffs, the political screed? Worth a try, don't you think?
"Love one another" is nothing less than Jesus Christ's New Commandment (1 John 3:23). Love, agape, is nothing less than the very nature of God (1 John 4:8,16).
1 John talks about sin, too. He chides us to discontinue our sins because a sinful life is inconsistent with a life steeped in God's love. And how do we move out of a sinful life? "If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9). And, "This is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins....We love because God first loved us" (1 John 4:10,19).
"Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth" (1 John 3:18).
I have much less to say about 2 and 3 John. They are such short, personal letters. One wonders exactly why they were included in the canon of the New Testament, but apparently they were from the earliest times. Perhaps because they were attributed to the same author, who was so revered for his other writings. Maybe they were just tucked into the same envelope as they traveled about Christendom.
Still, the main thrust of both epistles is a warning against itinerant preachers of the day who went around spouting heretical teaching, probably an early version of Gnosticism.
I find it amazing that within just a few decades of Jesus' resurrection, the group of His followers were having to deal with heretical, charlatans who were twisting the message of the gospel just enough to attract slightly confused adherents.
Does that sound familiar, some 2000 years later?
This time, I read them in my Greek-English diglot. That just means I read them in English but I could quickly refer to the Greek when I felt like it. This process made me more aware than ever of the similarities between 1 John and the Gospel of John.
1 John is, I think, known as the "Love Book." The word "love," or "agape" in Greek, is used about a zillion times. (I know, Greek students, I could easily look up the exact number of uses with one of my Bible tools, but I'm too lazy.)
One can't walk away from reading 1 John without some soul-searching on how seriously "we" take Jesus' commands to love one another. More often, we judge one another. We disdain one another. We are suspicious of one another. We get caught up in one another's life style or other choices. We love our neighbor very much less than we love ourself.
Really: What would happen if all of us in this highly charged election year started from a position of loving others? What if we were able to look past people's words, deeds, political convictions, moral choices, sexual orientation, etc., etc. and just begin by loving them? Would it cut down on the ideological standoffs, the political screed? Worth a try, don't you think?
"Love one another" is nothing less than Jesus Christ's New Commandment (1 John 3:23). Love, agape, is nothing less than the very nature of God (1 John 4:8,16).
1 John talks about sin, too. He chides us to discontinue our sins because a sinful life is inconsistent with a life steeped in God's love. And how do we move out of a sinful life? "If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9). And, "This is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins....We love because God first loved us" (1 John 4:10,19).
"Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth" (1 John 3:18).
I have much less to say about 2 and 3 John. They are such short, personal letters. One wonders exactly why they were included in the canon of the New Testament, but apparently they were from the earliest times. Perhaps because they were attributed to the same author, who was so revered for his other writings. Maybe they were just tucked into the same envelope as they traveled about Christendom.
Still, the main thrust of both epistles is a warning against itinerant preachers of the day who went around spouting heretical teaching, probably an early version of Gnosticism.
I find it amazing that within just a few decades of Jesus' resurrection, the group of His followers were having to deal with heretical, charlatans who were twisting the message of the gospel just enough to attract slightly confused adherents.
Does that sound familiar, some 2000 years later?
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Joel: Biblical proportions
The book of Joel is short; only three chapters. Scholars aren't sure if it was written in the 9th century or 6th century B.C., but that doesn't matter very much. The overarching message is that Yahweh is about to rain down judgment on Israel as well as other nations for their wickedness, on the coming Day of the Lord. But if the people will repent, He will restore and bless Israel.
There's a famous, comforting passage in Joel, referring to the Day of the Lord: "And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days. I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and billows of smoke. The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And everyone who calls on the name of the lord will be saved, for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance, as the Lord has said, among the survivors whom the Lord calls" (Joel 2:28-32).
Perhaps the most remarkable feature of Joel is his description of an invasion of locusts. Scholars believe he was talking about a real event, although it could be construed as a metaphor for God's wrath and/or for the devastation from invasions of foreign armies--Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, or Romans.
As with the other minor (and major) prophets, Joel's message is scary and disturbing because it can be applied across the ages: God will not tolerate wickedness forever; He certainly could and perhaps will unleash His wrath.
For me, though, the book of Joel makes my thoughts wander to a couple of my favorite pieces of American literature.
First, the description of the invasion of locusts makes me think of On the Banks of Plum Creek by Laura Ingalls Wilder. The chapter "The Glittering Cloud" describes one of the devastating infestations of locusts in the 1870s on the American prairie. It's horrifying, and a scene right out of Joel. When people say "Locust swarms of biblical proportions," they're talking about Joel (or possibly the plague of locusts in Exodus 10).
The other link to a favorite book is Joel 3:14: "Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision!" (My NIV text note says this would refer to a valley where God passes judgment on the people.) In the 1951 World War II novel The Caine Mutiny by Herman Wouk, one of the characters, Thomas Keefer, publishes a novel about the war that he entitles Multitudes, Multitudes. There's not really any explanation about why that title is used. Wouk was a Jewish biblical scholar in his own right, so it's fun to speculate. I suppose it was used by the character, and by Wouk, to illustrate that all the multitudes of people involved in the war were subject to God's judgment.
The two images tie together for Joel's readers and for us today. We must remember that we are all in the Valley of Decision--subject to God's judgment; and God's judgment can be as horrifying and devastating as an invasion of multitudes and multitudes of locusts.
And, friends, that is a vision of biblical proportion.
There's a famous, comforting passage in Joel, referring to the Day of the Lord: "And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days. I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and billows of smoke. The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And everyone who calls on the name of the lord will be saved, for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance, as the Lord has said, among the survivors whom the Lord calls" (Joel 2:28-32).
Perhaps the most remarkable feature of Joel is his description of an invasion of locusts. Scholars believe he was talking about a real event, although it could be construed as a metaphor for God's wrath and/or for the devastation from invasions of foreign armies--Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, or Romans.
As with the other minor (and major) prophets, Joel's message is scary and disturbing because it can be applied across the ages: God will not tolerate wickedness forever; He certainly could and perhaps will unleash His wrath.
For me, though, the book of Joel makes my thoughts wander to a couple of my favorite pieces of American literature.
First, the description of the invasion of locusts makes me think of On the Banks of Plum Creek by Laura Ingalls Wilder. The chapter "The Glittering Cloud" describes one of the devastating infestations of locusts in the 1870s on the American prairie. It's horrifying, and a scene right out of Joel. When people say "Locust swarms of biblical proportions," they're talking about Joel (or possibly the plague of locusts in Exodus 10).
The other link to a favorite book is Joel 3:14: "Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision!" (My NIV text note says this would refer to a valley where God passes judgment on the people.) In the 1951 World War II novel The Caine Mutiny by Herman Wouk, one of the characters, Thomas Keefer, publishes a novel about the war that he entitles Multitudes, Multitudes. There's not really any explanation about why that title is used. Wouk was a Jewish biblical scholar in his own right, so it's fun to speculate. I suppose it was used by the character, and by Wouk, to illustrate that all the multitudes of people involved in the war were subject to God's judgment.
The two images tie together for Joel's readers and for us today. We must remember that we are all in the Valley of Decision--subject to God's judgment; and God's judgment can be as horrifying and devastating as an invasion of multitudes and multitudes of locusts.
And, friends, that is a vision of biblical proportion.
John: Another point of view
I thought I'd write about reading the Gospel of John before I leave town for a few days.
I love all the Gospels. Each has its own unique characteristics. What I like best about John is the way it presents "the rest of the story." You probably know that Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the "Synoptic Gospels" because they have more or less the same viewpoint and seem to draw on common sources (whatever those sources may be!). Scholars believe John was written a number of decades afterwards. It almost seems like John read the Synoptics then said, "I have some important comments to add."
There are some significant differences in John, compared to the Synoptics. For example, John describes at least two and maybe three trips to Jerusalem for Passover. He doesn't really describe the Last Supper, with the bread and the wine, although he has a lengthy "Upper Room Discourse." John is the only Gospel to tell the story of the raising of Lazarus. That sort of thing.
Although the language (in Greek) is pretty easy to read (compared to, say, Luke-Acts), the Gospel of John is quite sophisticated literarily. For example, there are interesting nuances like Jesus' words to Nathanel in 1:50 "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that..." that are echoed in His words to Thomas in 20:29, "Because you have seen me you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." There are all sorts of interesting plays on words, double meanings, and such.
John's Gospel always feels a little more "polemical" than the other Synoptics. Jesus seems to spend more time arguing with other theologians, and there are also passages (which could be the narrator, John, rather than Jesus speaking) that are also quite theological in tone.
Years ago, I was reading about the so-called Gnostic Gospels, books written about the same time as John that were the beginnings of Gnosticism, a heresy with some similarities to Christianity. Although I've forgotten most of what I was reading back then, I remember being struck that quite a bit of John seemed to be aimed directly at those early Gnostics.
I suppose this is another illustration of the fact that the more you dig into and study the Gospels, or any Bible book for that matter, the more fascinating it becomes.
There are so many passages in John that I love. Whenever I get to John 11:25, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies. And whoever lives and believes in me will never die," I hear the exquisite musical setting of this from John Rutter's Requiem.
I am also extremely fond of John 15:1-17, the part about the vine and the branches. "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." It inspires me to do what I can to remain in Christ, which is primarily accomplished through prayer.
Neighbor, how long has it been since you read the Gospel of John? Well, that's too long.
I love all the Gospels. Each has its own unique characteristics. What I like best about John is the way it presents "the rest of the story." You probably know that Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the "Synoptic Gospels" because they have more or less the same viewpoint and seem to draw on common sources (whatever those sources may be!). Scholars believe John was written a number of decades afterwards. It almost seems like John read the Synoptics then said, "I have some important comments to add."
There are some significant differences in John, compared to the Synoptics. For example, John describes at least two and maybe three trips to Jerusalem for Passover. He doesn't really describe the Last Supper, with the bread and the wine, although he has a lengthy "Upper Room Discourse." John is the only Gospel to tell the story of the raising of Lazarus. That sort of thing.
Although the language (in Greek) is pretty easy to read (compared to, say, Luke-Acts), the Gospel of John is quite sophisticated literarily. For example, there are interesting nuances like Jesus' words to Nathanel in 1:50 "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that..." that are echoed in His words to Thomas in 20:29, "Because you have seen me you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." There are all sorts of interesting plays on words, double meanings, and such.
John's Gospel always feels a little more "polemical" than the other Synoptics. Jesus seems to spend more time arguing with other theologians, and there are also passages (which could be the narrator, John, rather than Jesus speaking) that are also quite theological in tone.
Years ago, I was reading about the so-called Gnostic Gospels, books written about the same time as John that were the beginnings of Gnosticism, a heresy with some similarities to Christianity. Although I've forgotten most of what I was reading back then, I remember being struck that quite a bit of John seemed to be aimed directly at those early Gnostics.
I suppose this is another illustration of the fact that the more you dig into and study the Gospels, or any Bible book for that matter, the more fascinating it becomes.
There are so many passages in John that I love. Whenever I get to John 11:25, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies. And whoever lives and believes in me will never die," I hear the exquisite musical setting of this from John Rutter's Requiem.
I am also extremely fond of John 15:1-17, the part about the vine and the branches. "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." It inspires me to do what I can to remain in Christ, which is primarily accomplished through prayer.
Neighbor, how long has it been since you read the Gospel of John? Well, that's too long.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)