After finishing Daniel, next on my alphabetical list of Bible books was Deuteronomy (see my post from January 12). But I read that back in January, so I was on to Ecclesiastes. I meant to just read half of it this morning, but I was so enthralled I read all 12 chapters.
A few years ago, we worked through Ecclesiastes in the single adult Sunday School class I was teaching. Most of the people in the class, including myself, were slightly familiar with the book; just enough to have a negative predisposition. After all, the book starts off by declaring, "Meaningless! Meaningless! Everything is meaningless!" (Or "Vanity! Vanity!" in the King James version.)
The text is attributed to "Qohelet" which is translated from the Hebrew as "Teacher." If I remember correctly, qohelet also suggests an assembly or gathering. The Greek word translating the Hebrew is ekklesiastes, meaning, "called out, summoned," or "a gathering, assembly." However, traditionally, the book has been attributed to King Solomon, famous for his wealth and his wisdom. Whether he actually wrote it or not (and it may have been written quite a bit later than the 10th century B.C.), it sounds like it could have been.
There's little doubt that the book was written by a world-class curmudgeon. He talks about all his wealth and power, and how he used his legendary wisdom to try to understand the Meaning of Life. That's kind of the gist of the book, but there are a lot of interesting sections.
Most people of my generation are very familiar with the passage in Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 that was made into a famous song, "Turn! Turn! Turn!" or "To Everything There Is a Season" written by Pete Seeger and recorded by The Byrds. That passage (and song) captures a good part of the message of Ecclesiastes: Life continues, good and bad, up and down, generation after generation. The final line of the song is "A time for peace;I swear it's not too late." The "I swear it's not too late" phrase isn't in the biblical text, but in my opinion, Solomon would approve. Even though the book has a sense of inevitability, Qohelet charges people to make the most of what they have, including the opportunities that come along.
A lot of the observations in Ecclesiastes could come out of the world today. Rich people who are not satisfied with what they have. Kings and rulers who struggle to hold on to their power. Oppression and injustice in the marketplace and the judicial courts.
There is a sweet part, 4:7-12, that discusses how much better life is with a close companion, whether it's a brother, a son, or a friend (or a spouse).
Much of the wisdom in Ecclesiastes sounds like Proverbs. Much is highly practical: "Do not pay attention to every word people say or you may hear your servant cursing you--for you know in your heart that many times you yourself have cursed others" (7:21-22). "Do not revile the king even in your thoughts, or curse the rich in your bedroom, because a bird of the air may carry your words, and a bird on the wing may report what you say" (10:20) "As dead flies give perfume a bad smell, so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honor" (10:1).
Yes, a lot of Ecclesiastes is pessimistic and bleak; kind of along the lines of "Life is short, and then you die." (Isn't there a version of that saying that's a little earthier? That, too, would be an apt interpretation of Ecclesiastes.)
Still, for me, the take-away message is this: Everyone has good things and tragic things happen, and everyone has his or her allotment of work and of food or other resources. Enjoyment and contentment are more a matter of attitude. See 5:18-20; the center of the text.
Moreover, "A man can do nother better than to eat and drink and find satisfaction in his work. This too, I see, is from the hand of God, for without Him, who can eat or find enjoyment? To the man who pleases Him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness..." (2:24-26a) And who pleases God? I think it's the person who reaches out and accepts God, who has (as we Evangelicals say) a personal relationship with God.
I believe it is God who gives meaning to our life; and the meaning leads to the contentment and enjoyment. Otherwise, (2:26b-27) "...but to the sinner He gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind."
The other final message of Ecclesiastes is in the last couple of verses: "Fear God and keep His commandments for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil" (12:13-14).
Ecclesiastes is a great book. Go, now, pick up your Bible and read it!
Monday, February 27, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Daniel: An Exemplar of Faith
The Book of Daniel. Some of the all-time favorite Bible stories are in this book: Daniel in the lions' den; and Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the Fiery Furnace. I also like the part in chapter 1 where Daniel and his (above-named) cohorts choose to eat vegetarian food rather than the defiled Babylonian meats, and they end up healthier than other kids in their class. Oh, yes: the Writing on the Wall story in chapter 5 is great, too. And I can't forget about Nebuchadnezzar going crazy and eating grass.
A huge portion of Daniel is apocryphal literature, "symbolic, visionary, prophetic literature, usually composed during oppressive conditions and being chiefly eschatological in theological content." Frankly, apocryphal literature always makes me nervous. At least Daniel isn't as challenging as Revelation!
I think my Sunday School class would like to do a study of Revelation. The problem is that because apocryphal literature is so intentionally obscure, it's open to all kinds of interpretation. To teach it well, one should review as many interpretations as possible. In the case of Revelation, there are only about a bazillion views--broken down into about half a bazillion "schools" of thought. My heart sinks at the thought of how much time it would take to really research, digest, and then try to teach all that in a coherent fashion.
With regard to the apocryphal portions of Daniel, some of it is interpreted right in the text. The angels Gabriel and Michael actually appeared to Daniel and helped him understand what some of the symbols in his prophetic visions would mean.
I love the fact that those angels have names! Gabriel shows up again in Luke 1:19, announcing the birth of John (the Baptizer) to Zechariah; and again in 1:26, announcing the birth of Jesus to Mary.
Some of the prophecies are so specific, skeptical scholars have opined that Daniel must have been written--as a fictional account--in about the second century before Christ, as opposed to the traditional view that it was written in the sixth century, and likely by Daniel himself. The prophecies about the ruling dynasties that would follow the Babylonians are so clear -- everything but actual names and dates.
I found myself wondering, however, how Jewish scholars would interpret the passages, here and in other OT prophetic books, that Christians see as pointing directly to Jesus Christ. Daniel 2:44, 7:27, and 9:25 ff seem to point to a Messiah who would rise during the time of the Roman Empire.
I have to say that I prefer the narrative parts of Daniel to the prophetic/apocryphal parts. The book covers his life from when he was a teen-ager, freshly deported from Israel in about 605 B.C., to when he was an old man, still serving in the court of Darius in about 539. Every time he is described, sometimes in his own words, he seems to be such a wise, serene figure--loved and respected by the Babylonians as much as by his own people.
Whether he's eating vegetables, perceiving and interpreting the king's dreams, praying despite a law forbidding prayers to gods other than Babylonia's, explaining the words written on the wall, or trembling before the angels Michael and Gabriel, Daniel is an exemplar of faith and the strength that comes from total devotion to God.
A huge portion of Daniel is apocryphal literature, "symbolic, visionary, prophetic literature, usually composed during oppressive conditions and being chiefly eschatological in theological content." Frankly, apocryphal literature always makes me nervous. At least Daniel isn't as challenging as Revelation!
I think my Sunday School class would like to do a study of Revelation. The problem is that because apocryphal literature is so intentionally obscure, it's open to all kinds of interpretation. To teach it well, one should review as many interpretations as possible. In the case of Revelation, there are only about a bazillion views--broken down into about half a bazillion "schools" of thought. My heart sinks at the thought of how much time it would take to really research, digest, and then try to teach all that in a coherent fashion.
With regard to the apocryphal portions of Daniel, some of it is interpreted right in the text. The angels Gabriel and Michael actually appeared to Daniel and helped him understand what some of the symbols in his prophetic visions would mean.
I love the fact that those angels have names! Gabriel shows up again in Luke 1:19, announcing the birth of John (the Baptizer) to Zechariah; and again in 1:26, announcing the birth of Jesus to Mary.
Some of the prophecies are so specific, skeptical scholars have opined that Daniel must have been written--as a fictional account--in about the second century before Christ, as opposed to the traditional view that it was written in the sixth century, and likely by Daniel himself. The prophecies about the ruling dynasties that would follow the Babylonians are so clear -- everything but actual names and dates.
I found myself wondering, however, how Jewish scholars would interpret the passages, here and in other OT prophetic books, that Christians see as pointing directly to Jesus Christ. Daniel 2:44, 7:27, and 9:25 ff seem to point to a Messiah who would rise during the time of the Roman Empire.
I have to say that I prefer the narrative parts of Daniel to the prophetic/apocryphal parts. The book covers his life from when he was a teen-ager, freshly deported from Israel in about 605 B.C., to when he was an old man, still serving in the court of Darius in about 539. Every time he is described, sometimes in his own words, he seems to be such a wise, serene figure--loved and respected by the Babylonians as much as by his own people.
Whether he's eating vegetables, perceiving and interpreting the king's dreams, praying despite a law forbidding prayers to gods other than Babylonia's, explaining the words written on the wall, or trembling before the angels Michael and Gabriel, Daniel is an exemplar of faith and the strength that comes from total devotion to God.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
2 Corinthians: A Portrait of Pastoring
When I read 2 Corinthians, I once again remembered why I never wanted to be a pastor. (Not that my being ordained as a pastor was even a possibility in my church; but that's a subject for another day.)
Paul's first letter to the church in Corinth was full of tender advice and answers to their questions. Some of that compassion is in 2 Corinthians as well. There are a couple of sections that I especially appreciate. As a former chairman of the church's Stewardship Committee, I found chapters 8 and 9 to be a goldmine of ideas and persuasive arguments.
Even better, chapters 3 through 5 describe the ineffable understanding and insight that come with receiving the Holy Spirit through faith. There is beautiful language about how Christian believers can cope with suffering and persecution and about the renewal and recreation of those who believe in Christ.
But a lot of the Paul's words in 2 Corinthians suggest his frustration at dealing with recalcitrant people.
The first two chapters sound like Paul is justifying himself and his plans to the Corinthians. He had intended to visit them, but changed his mind. He writes that he was afraid he'd upset them with "another painful visit." And it seems that part of the pain of the previous visit had to do with an errant church member. It also appears that the church people accused him of being fickle or unreliable, since he changed his travel plans.
In the later chapters, from about chapter 10 through 12, Paul writes a remarkably personal account of his life and his suffering. The main purpose seems to be to justify himself in the face of attacks by other false apostles, and very likely, detractors in the Corinthian church as well.
I've been around the local church enough to know that pastors and staff members are constantly criticized for almost anything. Their sermons are too long; they're too shallow; they're too brainy. The staff members are too lavish with church funds; they're too tight-fisted; they're not visionary enough; they're hopeless dreamers. You get the idea. As it's said, they can't win for losing.
And if complaining people aren't enough aggravation, sinning, backsliding and hypocritical people are always in abundance. Pastors really do want to help people be more Christ-like, and it must hurt like heck to see people continually shooting themselves in their spiritual feet.
Obviously, the problems have been going on for centuries. Just ask Paul.
Paul's first letter to the church in Corinth was full of tender advice and answers to their questions. Some of that compassion is in 2 Corinthians as well. There are a couple of sections that I especially appreciate. As a former chairman of the church's Stewardship Committee, I found chapters 8 and 9 to be a goldmine of ideas and persuasive arguments.
Even better, chapters 3 through 5 describe the ineffable understanding and insight that come with receiving the Holy Spirit through faith. There is beautiful language about how Christian believers can cope with suffering and persecution and about the renewal and recreation of those who believe in Christ.
But a lot of the Paul's words in 2 Corinthians suggest his frustration at dealing with recalcitrant people.
The first two chapters sound like Paul is justifying himself and his plans to the Corinthians. He had intended to visit them, but changed his mind. He writes that he was afraid he'd upset them with "another painful visit." And it seems that part of the pain of the previous visit had to do with an errant church member. It also appears that the church people accused him of being fickle or unreliable, since he changed his travel plans.
In the later chapters, from about chapter 10 through 12, Paul writes a remarkably personal account of his life and his suffering. The main purpose seems to be to justify himself in the face of attacks by other false apostles, and very likely, detractors in the Corinthian church as well.
I've been around the local church enough to know that pastors and staff members are constantly criticized for almost anything. Their sermons are too long; they're too shallow; they're too brainy. The staff members are too lavish with church funds; they're too tight-fisted; they're not visionary enough; they're hopeless dreamers. You get the idea. As it's said, they can't win for losing.
And if complaining people aren't enough aggravation, sinning, backsliding and hypocritical people are always in abundance. Pastors really do want to help people be more Christ-like, and it must hurt like heck to see people continually shooting themselves in their spiritual feet.
Obviously, the problems have been going on for centuries. Just ask Paul.
Monday, February 20, 2012
1 Corinthians: Love for All Times
Paul's First Letter to the Church at Corinth, or 1 Corinthians. I am thinking there is something to be said for my approach to reading through the Bible (RTTB) in alphabetical order. Hopping around a bit helps me look more keenly at each book and view it in an out-of-context way that's been enlightening.
There are parts of 1 Corinthians that are some of my favorite passages in the Bible. Chapter 13, the "Love Chapter," comes to mind of course. Recently, we used verses 4 through 8 with our Young Lives girls. We figured they would see themselves and their babies in the description of agape, Christ-like love. We also hoped they would evaluate their other "love" relationships by these holy standards.
I guess this time as I read the book I was struck by the pastoral advice, directed to some very specific and difficult problems in the church that gathered in ancient Corinth. We know that the church was very diverse--a mix of ethnic and religious backgrounds as well as a mix of social strata.
The church apparently had problems with factions, i.e., different groups following after certain leaders. There was a problem with gross sexual immorality. People were suing each other in civil courts.
They were also struggling to figure out what was proper in a worship gathering. How were they to commemorate the Lord's Supper? What was proper dress and decorum, especially for women? Did people who spoke in tongues have a superior form of spirituality?
Then there were the difficult theological issues: What could they expect regarding Christ's return, or the resurrection of the dead, or their own resurrection bodies?
A very interesting section discusses the issue of eating meat that had been sacrificed to idols. And Paul ended the letter with a reminder to save up and give to the church's collection.
As you read the letter, you can tell that Paul was writing very specifically to people he knew well about problems on which he had been thoroughly briefed. This specificity raises some questions that challenge the Christian church to this very day. How much of what Paul wrote applied strictly to the people in that church at that time and how much applies to believers anywhere, any time?
Some of the problems he addresses are clearly timeless. "I appeal to you brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you..." (1:10). Or 6:5-6: "Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead one brother goes to law against another--and this in front of unbelievers!" "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it." (10:13) "Now you are the body of Christ and each one of you is a part of it." (12:27)
A few of the problems don't seem to be very relevant any longer: "Some people are so accustomed to idols that when they eat [meat sacrificed at idols' temples] they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled." (8:7)
But what about his instructions to people about marriage in chapter 7? He seems to discourage people from tying the knot because of the "present crisis" (7:26) unless they just can't control their passions.
Or what about his instructions for worship services: "Two or three prophets should speak and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop." (14:29-30). If this describes the norm for worship, there are a lot of churches that should completely revise their eleven o'clock services! And how should churches handle the command, "Greet one another with a holy kiss" (16:20)?
The reason I spent so much time thinking about the timelessness of Paul's words is that parts of 1 Corinthians have been used as proof texts for 2000 years to keep women out of leadership positions in the church. "As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (14:33-35) (There's more like this in 1 Timothy 3.)
Some church types cling to a tight, literal interpretation of those verses. But why are they not so adamant about pronouncements such as: "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head....Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him?" (11:3,14) I have to wonder what church personnel committees did back in the long-haired 1970s! Now that I think of it, maybe this is the reason that there are so many bald pastors at my church.
I certainly don't have a definitive answer to the dilemma of how Paul's words to an ancient Greek church should be applied to modern churches. I think the answer must be that Christians are to carefully consider the biblical text, understand as much about its context as possible, and pray earnestly for wisdom and guidance when they choose to apply it to present-day issues.
Most of all, Christians should take to heart the Love Chapter, including 13:1-2: "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have a gift of prophcy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains but have not love, I am nothing."
There are parts of 1 Corinthians that are some of my favorite passages in the Bible. Chapter 13, the "Love Chapter," comes to mind of course. Recently, we used verses 4 through 8 with our Young Lives girls. We figured they would see themselves and their babies in the description of agape, Christ-like love. We also hoped they would evaluate their other "love" relationships by these holy standards.
I guess this time as I read the book I was struck by the pastoral advice, directed to some very specific and difficult problems in the church that gathered in ancient Corinth. We know that the church was very diverse--a mix of ethnic and religious backgrounds as well as a mix of social strata.
The church apparently had problems with factions, i.e., different groups following after certain leaders. There was a problem with gross sexual immorality. People were suing each other in civil courts.
They were also struggling to figure out what was proper in a worship gathering. How were they to commemorate the Lord's Supper? What was proper dress and decorum, especially for women? Did people who spoke in tongues have a superior form of spirituality?
Then there were the difficult theological issues: What could they expect regarding Christ's return, or the resurrection of the dead, or their own resurrection bodies?
A very interesting section discusses the issue of eating meat that had been sacrificed to idols. And Paul ended the letter with a reminder to save up and give to the church's collection.
As you read the letter, you can tell that Paul was writing very specifically to people he knew well about problems on which he had been thoroughly briefed. This specificity raises some questions that challenge the Christian church to this very day. How much of what Paul wrote applied strictly to the people in that church at that time and how much applies to believers anywhere, any time?
Some of the problems he addresses are clearly timeless. "I appeal to you brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you..." (1:10). Or 6:5-6: "Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead one brother goes to law against another--and this in front of unbelievers!" "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it." (10:13) "Now you are the body of Christ and each one of you is a part of it." (12:27)
A few of the problems don't seem to be very relevant any longer: "Some people are so accustomed to idols that when they eat [meat sacrificed at idols' temples] they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled." (8:7)
But what about his instructions to people about marriage in chapter 7? He seems to discourage people from tying the knot because of the "present crisis" (7:26) unless they just can't control their passions.
Or what about his instructions for worship services: "Two or three prophets should speak and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop." (14:29-30). If this describes the norm for worship, there are a lot of churches that should completely revise their eleven o'clock services! And how should churches handle the command, "Greet one another with a holy kiss" (16:20)?
The reason I spent so much time thinking about the timelessness of Paul's words is that parts of 1 Corinthians have been used as proof texts for 2000 years to keep women out of leadership positions in the church. "As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (14:33-35) (There's more like this in 1 Timothy 3.)
Some church types cling to a tight, literal interpretation of those verses. But why are they not so adamant about pronouncements such as: "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head....Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him?" (11:3,14) I have to wonder what church personnel committees did back in the long-haired 1970s! Now that I think of it, maybe this is the reason that there are so many bald pastors at my church.
I certainly don't have a definitive answer to the dilemma of how Paul's words to an ancient Greek church should be applied to modern churches. I think the answer must be that Christians are to carefully consider the biblical text, understand as much about its context as possible, and pray earnestly for wisdom and guidance when they choose to apply it to present-day issues.
Most of all, Christians should take to heart the Love Chapter, including 13:1-2: "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have a gift of prophcy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains but have not love, I am nothing."
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Colossians: Desperately seeking transformation
After 1 and 2 Chronicles, the next Bible book alphabetically is Colossians. It's only four chapters, so it's a one-day reading.
I love the book of Colossians. When I was getting ready to go to Dallas Seminary, I was enthralled by a couple of passages that deal with our understanding of theology: 1:9 "...asking God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all spiritual wisdom and understanding." Also, 2:8 "See to it that no one takes you captive through holoow and deceptive philosphy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." It was encouraging to me that my hunger for deeper understanding of God's Word could be satisfied.
In previous, more formal studies of Colossians, I was intrigued with what's called "The Colossian Heresy." Scholars believe that the letter was written to refute heretical teaching in Colosse; very likely it was an early form of Gnosticism. Paul doesn't spell out the details of the heresy. Rather, he admonishes the people to not let anyone else's teaching draw them away from the truths they learned from him. To be honest, I didn't really try to recall what I used to know about Gnosticism as I read Colossians today. If you ever have the time and a good commentary, it's interesting and useful to know what other philosophies were competing with early Christianity.
Instead, I was struck by Paul's passion and purpose for his readers: 2:2 "My purpose is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."
I spend a great deal of my time and effort working with teen-age mothers in Young Lives, a part of Young Life. I can hardly think of a clearer description of what I/we try to accomplish with our precious young women than what Paul writes here. He's calling for a complete transformation of a person's life, based on a relationship with Jesus.
What can transform a person? What can make a life-changing difference in the way one views the world? Certainly great life changes and events--joys and tragedies alike--have the potential of causing a change. But I think a transformation is almost always rooted in a personal relationship, or how we relate to another person(s). And that's what Paul wants for his people, for ALL people: that kind of relationship that fundamentally changes one's outlook on life. And Christ can effect a change that deep and life-saving. "So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in him, rooted and built up win him, strenghtened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness....having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead." (2:6-7, 12).
But wait -- there's more! Paul's beautiful language describes the transformation then goes on to describe how we should live as transformed people. Chapter 3 in my NIV Bible is subtitled, "Rules for Holy Living." It's remarkably concise, yet it covers what we should abandon: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed (verse 3:5) plus anger, rage, malice, slander and filthy language (verse 3:8). Verse 3:12 tells us what we should embrace: compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
Paul also reminds us of our unity as Christian believers and the preeminence of love in our dealings with one another. He concludes chapter 3 with brief instructions for households--husbands, wives, children, and servants.
The whole book is so gentle, sweet, pastoral and personal, I always feel uplifted when I read it. Now it's your turn: Couldn't you use a little transformation today?
I love the book of Colossians. When I was getting ready to go to Dallas Seminary, I was enthralled by a couple of passages that deal with our understanding of theology: 1:9 "...asking God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all spiritual wisdom and understanding." Also, 2:8 "See to it that no one takes you captive through holoow and deceptive philosphy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." It was encouraging to me that my hunger for deeper understanding of God's Word could be satisfied.
In previous, more formal studies of Colossians, I was intrigued with what's called "The Colossian Heresy." Scholars believe that the letter was written to refute heretical teaching in Colosse; very likely it was an early form of Gnosticism. Paul doesn't spell out the details of the heresy. Rather, he admonishes the people to not let anyone else's teaching draw them away from the truths they learned from him. To be honest, I didn't really try to recall what I used to know about Gnosticism as I read Colossians today. If you ever have the time and a good commentary, it's interesting and useful to know what other philosophies were competing with early Christianity.
Instead, I was struck by Paul's passion and purpose for his readers: 2:2 "My purpose is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."
I spend a great deal of my time and effort working with teen-age mothers in Young Lives, a part of Young Life. I can hardly think of a clearer description of what I/we try to accomplish with our precious young women than what Paul writes here. He's calling for a complete transformation of a person's life, based on a relationship with Jesus.
What can transform a person? What can make a life-changing difference in the way one views the world? Certainly great life changes and events--joys and tragedies alike--have the potential of causing a change. But I think a transformation is almost always rooted in a personal relationship, or how we relate to another person(s). And that's what Paul wants for his people, for ALL people: that kind of relationship that fundamentally changes one's outlook on life. And Christ can effect a change that deep and life-saving. "So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in him, rooted and built up win him, strenghtened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness....having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead." (2:6-7, 12).
But wait -- there's more! Paul's beautiful language describes the transformation then goes on to describe how we should live as transformed people. Chapter 3 in my NIV Bible is subtitled, "Rules for Holy Living." It's remarkably concise, yet it covers what we should abandon: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed (verse 3:5) plus anger, rage, malice, slander and filthy language (verse 3:8). Verse 3:12 tells us what we should embrace: compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
Paul also reminds us of our unity as Christian believers and the preeminence of love in our dealings with one another. He concludes chapter 3 with brief instructions for households--husbands, wives, children, and servants.
The whole book is so gentle, sweet, pastoral and personal, I always feel uplifted when I read it. Now it's your turn: Couldn't you use a little transformation today?
Saturday, February 11, 2012
2 Chronicles: When will we ever learn?
I liked 2 Chronicles better than I liked 1 Chronicles. Fewer lists of names, I suppose.
Second Chronicles provides a fascinating sweep of the history of Judah, the southern kingdom, from the time of Solomon until its demise in 586 B.C. It's a repeating cycle of kings either honoring God with worship and devotion--and receiving blessing and protection for themselves and the people--or ignoring God and worshiping foreign idols--and suffering personal and national penalties.
There are a lot of wicked kings in 2 Chronicles. And considering that the southern kingdom was supposedly still loyal to Yahweh (as opposed to the northern kingdom, Israel, that was blatantly apostate) it's disturbing to see how many were wicked, and even worse, how many started out well and became wicked -- such as Asa, Joash and Uzziah.
My favorite story in 2 Chronicles is in chapter 18 (and it parallels a passage in 1 Kings 22). Jehoshaphat (yes, that would be "jumpin' Jehoshaphat") ventured "down" from Jerusalem to Samaria to confer with Ahab, king of Israel. Ahab wanted Jehoshephat to join him in a battle to wrest the Israelite settlement of Ramoth Gilead away from the Arameans, even though both Jehoshaphat and Ahab had recently forged alliances with the Arameans.
Jehoshaphat was uneasy with the plan. Even though all the "prophets" of Israel (who were not Yahweh worshipers) prophesied in favor of the attack, Jehoshaphat thought it would be smart to consult with a prophet of Yahweh. "There is still one man through whom we can inquire of Yahweh," Ahab conceded, "but I hate him because he never prophesies anything good about me, but always bad." That statement always cracks me up for some reason.
The story continues. They called in this prophet, Micaiah, who started with a facetious promise that the attack would be successful. The kings were not fooled, and pressed him for a truthful prophecy. His answer was negative--implying that the people of Israel would be left without a leader, viz., Ahab. Ahab's follow-up comment to Jehoshaphat also cracks me up: "Didn't I tell you that he never prophesies anything good about me, but only bad?"
It's a great interchange. Sounds like a reality TV series: "Kings Behaving Badly."
Perhaps the most memorable passage from 2 Chronicles is early in the book, chapters 6 and 7. The Chronicler seems to have revered Solomon and wrote a lot of nice stuff about his temple building and dedication. There's a very long prayer of Solomon on behalf of the people and himself. The famous passage, however, is in the words of Yahweh: "If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chron 7:14.
What a fabulous promise of blessing! But it's followed by a dire threat of punishment: "But if you turn away and forsake the decrees and command I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them...." (2 Chron 14:19) The passage then enumerates the disaster and ridicule that would--and did--result.
Year after year, generation after generation, people have read these words. I think that there have been times when groups of suffering people would take them to heart and truly repent and then find relief and blessing from their suffering.
More often, though, people have read these words, shrugged their shoulders, and kept on serving gods other than Yahweh. The Bible records the results of this course for the people of Israel and Judah: they were wiped out and sent into exile, never to fully regain their position of power.
We can only guess how this will play out for the people of our age as we shrug our shoulders and keep on serving gods other than Yahweh.
People never learn from the past, it seems.
Second Chronicles provides a fascinating sweep of the history of Judah, the southern kingdom, from the time of Solomon until its demise in 586 B.C. It's a repeating cycle of kings either honoring God with worship and devotion--and receiving blessing and protection for themselves and the people--or ignoring God and worshiping foreign idols--and suffering personal and national penalties.
There are a lot of wicked kings in 2 Chronicles. And considering that the southern kingdom was supposedly still loyal to Yahweh (as opposed to the northern kingdom, Israel, that was blatantly apostate) it's disturbing to see how many were wicked, and even worse, how many started out well and became wicked -- such as Asa, Joash and Uzziah.
My favorite story in 2 Chronicles is in chapter 18 (and it parallels a passage in 1 Kings 22). Jehoshaphat (yes, that would be "jumpin' Jehoshaphat") ventured "down" from Jerusalem to Samaria to confer with Ahab, king of Israel. Ahab wanted Jehoshephat to join him in a battle to wrest the Israelite settlement of Ramoth Gilead away from the Arameans, even though both Jehoshaphat and Ahab had recently forged alliances with the Arameans.
Jehoshaphat was uneasy with the plan. Even though all the "prophets" of Israel (who were not Yahweh worshipers) prophesied in favor of the attack, Jehoshaphat thought it would be smart to consult with a prophet of Yahweh. "There is still one man through whom we can inquire of Yahweh," Ahab conceded, "but I hate him because he never prophesies anything good about me, but always bad." That statement always cracks me up for some reason.
The story continues. They called in this prophet, Micaiah, who started with a facetious promise that the attack would be successful. The kings were not fooled, and pressed him for a truthful prophecy. His answer was negative--implying that the people of Israel would be left without a leader, viz., Ahab. Ahab's follow-up comment to Jehoshaphat also cracks me up: "Didn't I tell you that he never prophesies anything good about me, but only bad?"
It's a great interchange. Sounds like a reality TV series: "Kings Behaving Badly."
Perhaps the most memorable passage from 2 Chronicles is early in the book, chapters 6 and 7. The Chronicler seems to have revered Solomon and wrote a lot of nice stuff about his temple building and dedication. There's a very long prayer of Solomon on behalf of the people and himself. The famous passage, however, is in the words of Yahweh: "If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chron 7:14.
What a fabulous promise of blessing! But it's followed by a dire threat of punishment: "But if you turn away and forsake the decrees and command I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them...." (2 Chron 14:19) The passage then enumerates the disaster and ridicule that would--and did--result.
Year after year, generation after generation, people have read these words. I think that there have been times when groups of suffering people would take them to heart and truly repent and then find relief and blessing from their suffering.
More often, though, people have read these words, shrugged their shoulders, and kept on serving gods other than Yahweh. The Bible records the results of this course for the people of Israel and Judah: they were wiped out and sent into exile, never to fully regain their position of power.
We can only guess how this will play out for the people of our age as we shrug our shoulders and keep on serving gods other than Yahweh.
People never learn from the past, it seems.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Envy: My new pet sin
A friend of mine is struggling with envy. This friend is involved in a months-long competitive situation for a desirable prize. The person she envies has had several successes, and my friend fears she will be beaten out again. Even worse, she worries she’ll be unhappy over the next months as the competition plays out.
I have advised this friend that life is too short for us to be dominated by envy.
I should know. It’s only within the last year that I realized how susceptible I am to envy. One day while I was praying, I asked God to show me my shortcomings. To my surprise, up popped envy. (I already knew that Pride was one of my pet sins.) I was able to see how many times I have shot myself in the foot because of envy. For example, I could probably benefit from spending time with a writers’ group or with individuals who have published their work in books or magazines. But I’ve never made myself take that step because of…envy.
There’s a reason they call those seven famous sins “deadly.” I always thought it was because they were sins that would condemn you to hell (or purgatory). Wikipedia says, “Theologically, a mortal sin is believed to destroy the life of grace within the person and thus creates the threat of eternal damnation.” Since I’m not Roman Catholic, I never paid those sins much mind.
But now I think that maybe they should be viewed as “deadly” because they can actually have a bad effect on your life. Think about it.
Gluttony: Everyone knows the problems that come with overeating.
Sloth: Everyone also knows the problems of being a couch potato.
Rage or Wrath leads to high blood pressure and cardiovascular injury.
Avarice or Greed: I’m thinking Type A behavior here, which also leads to high blood pressure and cardiovascular injury.
Lust: Even if we only confine this to sexual lust (although the term can imply much more), this can cause all kinds of trouble, starting with disease.
Pride: Proverbs 16:18 is paraphrased, “Pride goeth before a fall.” I don’t know about you, but I could probably write a book about the trouble my pride has caused me over the years!
That leaves Envy. Envy is when someone else has something that you want. It’s a lot like “coveting,” which is prohibited by the 10th Commandment.
Envy can eat you alive—from the inside out. You can get so consumed with wanting what someone else has that you act in ways you shouldn’t or, as in my case, fail to step out in ways that would be beneficial.
These sins are considered “root” sins because they lead to lots of other trickle-down bad behaviors. They also dovetail. Lust and greed. Sloth and gluttony. Pride and avarice. And so on. You can mix-n-match them!
But right now, my message to my friend(s) is: Don’t do as I have done. Instead, recognize and deal with that problem of envy before it kills you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)