21st Century Nazarene Sunday School

Sorrow and Suffering -- faithful companions

2009-10-22T18:37:00.000-07:00

In 1955 Hannah Hurnard published Hinds' Feet on High Places, an allegory featuring Much-Afraid who was called by the Chief Shepherd to climb from the Valley of Humiliation to the High Places. She had two traveling companions for the journey. They were named Sorrow and Suffering. In our Hebrews passage for this week, we discover that Jesus also walked with these companions and learned obedience from them.

The problem of pain and suffering is perhaps one of the oldest and most puzzling mysteries of life, particularly for those who believe the universe was created and is even now overseen by a God whose essence is love. I don't know the answers to the questions along this line that have been discussed throughout the ages, but I find it interesting that suffering is presented here as qualifying Jesus to be our high priest. Are there desirable character traits that can be developed by no other means? Are Sorrow and Suffering somehow essential to spiritual growth? Do they shape us in a fashion that cannot be accomplished by any other force?

The writer to the Hebrews notes in 5:2-3 that an earthly priest is "able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and going astray" because he himself is subject to weakness and obliged to "offer sacrifices for his own sins." However, in the case of Jesus, the writer notes a few verses later, it is the "prayers and petitions" he offered up "with loud cries and tears" as he "learned obedience from what he suffered" that qualifies him to be "high priest in the order of Melchizedek."

In my half-century of life, I have not encountered nearly so much pain as many of the people around me. Yet, I can see that I am a better person because of some of life's challenges -- more empathetic and caring. The "light and momentary troubles" (2 Cor. 4:17) that have come my way have been good for me. Perhaps learning obedience and submission during the tough times of life is preferable to being broken by the pain of sin and has the same effect of teaching us "to deal gently with those who are ignorant and going astray."

I certainly have no plans to go looking for painful experiences for the sake of building character. I figure trouble can find me plenty well without me going out looking for it. Still, it makes times of trouble more bearable to realize that there are useful lessons to be learned from those faithful companions called Sorrow and Suffering, lessons which can qualify those who suffer to share the burdens of those around them.

The Sabbath and Faith

2009-10-11T18:58:00.000-07:00

More and more, I associate the call to Sabbath rest in the Bible with faith. It requires faith to set aside the urgent tasks of living and take one day off every week. I must believe that what I can accomplish in six days is enough. And when I realize that it is obviously not enough, it takes faith in the love of God, the grace of God, to believe that submissive obedience counts more than accomplishment. I haven't done enough and yet ... today I will let it all go and simply rest. By faith, I believe that the world will not end if I quit spinning plates for one day. I can give them one final whirl on Saturday evening and then let them go until Monday with faith that the tasks I set aside will still be there waiting for me if they need to be done.

I find the church's treatment of the fourth Commandment a never-ending irony. Christians hold up the 10 Commandments as sacred and eternally valid -- except the fourth one. Only the fifth comes close to it for disregard. It's amazing how little popularity the positive "Thou shalt" commands have in comparison to those in the "Thou shall not" category.

In the case of the fourth commandment, I suspect a fear of hypocrisy softens the voice of the church. After all, the bulk of the 'work' of the church happens on Sunday, the Christian 'Sabbath.' There are sermons to preach, lessons to teach, tithes to collect, services to conduct, prayers to be prayed, music to be played, special emphases to be emphasized. And since we all have the day off, it's a good time to call a meeting and conduct church business. In between all the church activity, we'll fit in Sunday dinner and maybe watch some football or run to Wal-Mart. That's the current pattern. My grandmother used to do her "calling" on Sunday afternoons -- visiting the sick and elderly. Her Sunday were just as full, if not more so. Were they more holy?

It requires faith to push aside the urgency of our work and deliberately rest. Protecting sacred space in the week isn't easy. It requires faith that it's worth it simply because God ordained it. And it sometimes means accepting the label of hypocrite when declining to add another event to one's Sunday schedule. I regularly inconvenience people by resisting their requests to practice music at 9:00 am before Sunday School begins at 9:30. I shift as much activity as possible to other days, giving Sunday a restful rhythm of preparation, gathering, low-stress dining, relaxing, and gathering again. I accept interruptions to that flow as acceptable exceptions by God's grace, even as I invest energy in making sure the exceptions don't take up permanent residence. Part of the faith required for observing a Christian Sabbath is believing that every moment of the day is sacred but that inactivity isn't the only way to relax.

More and more, I associate the call to Sabbath rest with faith, faith that I am not so essential to the business of the world that I can't set it all aside for one day a week; faith that the disapproval of those whom I disappoint or irritate as I protect that sacred space is fully offset by the benefits of obedience; faith that being 'hypocritical' or 'inconsistent' for allowing some activities into the day while rejecting others will not significantly harm my witness as a follower of Jesus Christ; faith that there is a God who is more pleased to see me rest than take on more work.

I heartily recommend guarding some sacred space each week. It's a good reminder that the world is not our master. And, just as tithing our money is the first step toward fiscal responsibility, carving out space in our schedules is a great start for effective time management. If we all committed ourselves to a restful and rhythmic weekly sabbath, I suspect our Sunday schedules would become simpler and we would be healthier.

The Glory of God

2009-09-26T09:36:00.000-07:00

Then Moses said, "Now show me your glory."

And the LORD said, "I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the LORD, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live" - Exodus 33:18-20.

What does the face of God look like? God told Moses that no one could see His face and live. But in Hebrews 1:3 we're told that the Son is "the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being." In Jesus, long centuries after Moses, we can finally look on the "radiance of God's glory" and live.

So what does "the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being" look like with flesh on? Is it a man with a halo and glowing countenance dressed in brilliant white robes? That might fit with the description of "someone 'like a son of man' " in Revelation 1:13, but not so well with the man Jesus of Nazareth found in the gospels. No, in Jesus we find humility. He's hanging out in the hills of Galilee, eating with tax collectors and sinners, having his feet bathed by the tears and wiped with the hair of a woman of ill repute. He's teaching ordinary folks on ordinary hillsides or from ordinary fishing boats, seemingly an ordinary man by every measure other than having the power to heal and extraordinary authority for teaching. There seems to be little about him that catches the notice of the movers and shakers of his world. The religious leaders let him go on as long as they did out of fear of the people who adored him, not because they saw anything to fear in Jesus himself.

So what does it look like when we don the "radiance of the glory of God" and become "god-ly"? Do we have an angelic glow about us? If the "exact representation of [God's] being" -- Jesus -- blended so well into his daily world, should we expect to be noticed and awarded with honor and status? Should we expect the bulk of our ministry to be done in a public way in our "Jerusalem" or will we too be assigned radiate the glory of God in quiet unobtrusive ways on the backroads of "Galilee"?

As one who lives and does ministry out far from the spotlights, I find it interesting that our chief model of what God looks like in human flesh spent most of his life far from the glitz and glamor of the centers of power in his world.

I have often wondered what prompted people healed by Jesus to glorify God rather than worshiping the man who had touched them. Perhaps there's something to be said for being so extremely ordinary in appearance and lifestyle that it's obvious that any power and glory being demonstrated through us has to trace back to God.

Bible illiteracy

2009-09-19T19:59:00.000-07:00

People don't read like they used to. Newspaper offices are closing. Magazines are struggling to survive. Things are changing. I work in a library. If we were to base our spending decisions totally on demand, we would move out the books to make room for more videos and computer stations.

As literacy fades in our society, how will the Bible retain its place of influence? It has survived years of distance from the original authors and languages. It has been made readily available by means of the printing press and a world that produces books easily and economically. It is the all-time bestseller. But can it continue to be influential if people simply quit reading?

I was in a Bible study this week that arrived at the banks of the Red Sea with the Egyptians in hot pursuit. The pillar of cloud separated the Israelites from their pursuers and an east wind blew all night, piling up the water and exposing dry ground for crossing. One of the group expressed surprise concerning the long night of wind. In his mental picture, Moses (AKA Charlton Heston) holds his rod over the water and it divides like magic, no wind required. The most popular video version of the story doesn't quite jive with the biblical account behind it. If that's true for action scenes such as this, is it evern conceivable to consider converting the Bible to video format?

The good news in all this is that people are still acquiring the necessary skills for reading the Bible. They may be spending less time doing sustained reading of print material, but text continues to be used widely on the internet, perhaps the strongest replacement for the print material that was being consumed twenty-five years ago (well into the age of television). Literacy is still important to our society.

Still, how can we motivate people to include time with the Bible in their days? How can we form biblically literate disciples of Jesus Christ? How can we persuade them to turn off their iPods long enough to focus on a chapter or two from the living Word of God? Would it be better to somehow get an audio version of the Bible onto their iPods?

The Bible has survived a lot of challenges over the years. It will be interesting to see how it comes through this one.'

Driving out the moneychangers

2009-09-11T06:04:00.000-07:00

From the WordAction "teaching methods" for 9/13/09 regarding the persecuted church:

"Is it time for Christians to turn the other cheek? Or is it time to drive out the moneychangers?"

What a loaded question this seems! Maybe I'm bringing my own experience into it, but it seems to me that there's an underlying bias in it, that there's a "correct" answer and it isn't the "do nothing" option of turning the other cheek. Christians are being tortured and killed! We can't stand by silently while it happens.

My first response to the question is to question its validity. It gives us two mutually-exclusive responses. Either we let the persecution continue without protest or we wade in and do our best to make it stop, even if it means resorting to violence.

Do those two choices really exhaust our full range of possible responses to persecution of Christians around the world? Am I alone in perceiving the first choice as representing the option of non-engagement? Does it, for others, bring up, as it ought to, scenes of those who returned to minister to the Auca Indians in Ecuador following the death of Jim Elliot and three other missionaries?

Driving out the moneychangers is a curious scenario to bring into the discussion. The moneychangers in the Gospels were turning the worship of God into a commercial enterprise and as a result making worship difficult for those entering the temple courts. Who in the current story of the persecuted church fits that role? Is it possible to find "moneychangers" outside the walls of the church?

Another nagging aspect of bringing up the encounter between Jesus and the moneychangers is that it was one more step toward the cross. It happened at the beginning of his last week in Jerusalem. By the end of the week he was dead and we can presume that all those tables were back in place. While Jesus' action certainly wasn't pointless, one has to take the long view to see any benefit from it. In the short term, it simply gave the religious leaders one more reason to kill him without resolving anything about Jewish worship in Jerusalem.

Let's look at our options again. Is it time to minister to those who persecute us without retaliation? Is it time to focus on tearing down the barriers to worship erected by those seeking personal profit through religious enterprise even if it costs us everything? Is it time to try to overturn the activities of our persecutors with a whip, realizing that the attempt will likely cost us our lives? Is this a call to embrace martyrdom on behalf of the persecuted church? Will those who choose that option act alone or will they stir up others to fight and die with them -- or maybe on their behalf?

One of the presumptions behind the question is that it is time to do something to stop persecution of Christians around the world. Will we also seek to stop persecution of people from other religions? Would it be best to stop all violence in the world that occurs to any person for any reason? (If that were our goal, wouldn't it be intuitively obvious that it couldn't be done by means of violence?) Why are we primarily concerned about persecution against Christians? Is it because we fear it might someday be us?

Who knows what the Bible says?

2009-09-04T05:34:00.000-07:00

From the WordAction lesson exposition for 9/6/09:

Because Scripture comes from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the proper interpretation of Scripture cannot reside in individuals alone. Rather, it is in the community of the Holy Spirit, the Church. -- Roger Hahn

This statement cautions us to bring the truth we find in the Bible into the community of believers for evaluation and discussion rather than relying on our own ability to comprehend Scripture. It's a good reminder. In my experience, however, I find few people developing their own take on Scripture. What I see instead reminds me of the scene in Exodus 20 where the people "stayed at a distance and said to Moses, 'Speak to us yourself and we will listen. But do not have God speak to us or we will die.' " Many church attenders, it seems, rely completely on other people to tell them what the Bible says. Few are willing to invest the time and effort needed for personal Bible study.

To see where this leads, we need only to look back to the time when books were rare and literacy uncommon. Can church authorities today better resist the temptation to do Bible interpretation in a way that furthers their own goals? Can we grasp the full message of the Bible through regular church attendance or do we need to read it for ourselves?

It would be nice to think that today's religious leaders are immune to temptation to insert a personal agenda into their messages to the people they teach, that our preachers and teachers can be trusted to give us an accurate portrayal of God's Word. But the temptation is subtle and the results often beyond detection by those without a personal grasp of Scripture. To neglect personal Bible study is to open ourselves up to false doctrines. Just as we need community to shape our personal interpretations, we need personal study to shape the mindset of the community.

What a long way we are from the medieval church! We now have ready access to the Bible in compact, inexpensive manifestations. We have a choice of translations with tremendous scholarship behind them. Here in America, we are almost 100% literate, but those who, for whatever reason, prefer to listen rather than read can readily find audio versions of Scripture. How many people through the ages have given their lives to the work of making Bibles available to us in our own language? How many hours and years of effort are represented by the Bibles gathering dust in our homes?

Yes, we need community. We also need people within the community who can bring fresh insights to the group from their personal Bible study. We neglect our Bibles between Sundays to the detriment of the community we trust to interpret Scripture for us.

The Wrath of God

2009-08-22T17:55:00.000-07:00

This week's WordAction lesson is from Revelation 16 where the seven bowls of God's wrath are poured out. The lesson writer makes the point that "little is said from pulpits today about the wrath of God." He blames this on "cowardice and compromise, ... doubt and disbelief," noting that "modern pulpits ... are too often occupied by persons who are eager for acceptance, prestige, and reward."

Ironically, I find there is more risk in focusing on the love of God than on the wrath of God. I have been reminded several times that I need to "teach the truth." That "truth" would include not only the news that God is love and that there is a heaven to gain but also a strong warning that "the finally unrepentant shall suffer eternally in hell." (Manual, Church of the Nazarene, Article XVI.) Failing to include God's wrath in one's teaching is certainly not the road to acceptance, prestige, and reward where I teach! Rather, it can easily lead to accusations of being "soft on sin" and possible loss of position. Even those who want to focus on God's love for themselves like to hear and talk about the wrath coming on those who aren't walking the straight and narrow path.

Still, I don't focus much on the wrath of God. I grew up with an image of a frowning, disapproving Creator. Sure the song said: "the Father up above is looking down in love," but my experience with people who loved me provided plenty of evidence that love didn't mean an absence of disapproval and rebuke. With so few people who seemed to actually like me even when I put on my best face, how could I hope to earn the approval of a God who saw my every sin, heard my every lie and unkind word, and knew my every ugly thought? What a hopeless task it had to be to please God!

One of the stated goals of this week's lesson is "to place our complete trust in God and His mercy." As I have contemplated all this, it has struck me that, although I talk about God's love far more than His wrath, I actually place a lot of confidence, perhaps even "complete trust," in the justice of God as it is built into this world. Two verses are especially dear to me in this regard:

1. Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. (NIV)

2. Romans 12:17 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay." (NIV)

I depend on the truth of these two passages as support for an inner commitment to letting people "get away with murder." That commitment doesn't always (or even often) manage to overrule the emotional response to being wronged, but I fall back on those passages as the basis for letting go of the wrong as quickly as possible without demanding justice. Even if I do nothing, demand no apology, hold no grudge, plot no punishment, strike no blow in return, justice is built into this world. Nobody ever gets off scott-free. Sin has consequences. I depend on that. It helps me avoid a little more effectively the idea of taking justice into my own hands for fear God will overlook the wrong.

I don't need the bowls of wrath and the plagues of Revelation 16 for evidence to support my conviction that justice is always served in the end. I can observe the negative impact of sin all around me in this life. For example, the person who speaks to me in unloving tones, probably does not reserve those tones for me alone. I am likely far from the only person with whom he or she has conflict. I suspect the person who treats me like I'm an idiot lives in a world full of idiots and suffers no small amount of frustration. The person who makes strong demands of me likely lives in a world where the only way to get what he or she wants is to demand it. Nothing ever comes easily to them. Rather, they must scrabble for every foothold.

The natural tendency is for people to treat others as they are treated. Thus, the person who doesn't treat others well is unlikely to be treated well.

Is this the wrath of God? Does God rain lightning bolts, frogs, and hailstones down on those who fail to obey His law? Or is the wrath of God embodied in the consequences of sin built into the fabric of the universe and evident all around us? In Revelation 16, it is the former. Maybe that scene reflects some sort of reality. Or maybe it is highly symbolic and the wrath of God is more of a passive, "built-in," negative consequence of serving self.

I don't know what the reality of God's wrath is. I do know, however, that I live better when I cultivate my faith that justice is always served in some way, that, at some level, there are always negative consequences for negative actions. It's the key to peace, kindness, and forgiveness. I don't need to "get even" as long as I remain confident that God sees the wrong done and takes full responsibility for disciplining the wrongdoer.

God is love. And God is just. Righteousness brings heavenly bliss, sometimes surprisingly soon; unrighteousness brings terrible consequences, sometimes surprisingly soon. I'm counting on that.

"Without the shedding of blood ..."

2009-05-05T05:51:00.000-07:00

A quote from this week's lesson exposition:

Though many have called the blood sacrifice of Jesus gory and unnecessary, the Scriptures teach just the opposite. “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22) is stated without equivocation.

I am finding more and more that there is sense behind the laws given us in the Bible. As I read this statement, I wonder: Why? Why would forgiveness require the shedding of blood? And does it truly depend on "the blood sacrifice of Jesus"? Isn't a compassionate God free to have mercy on whom He will have mercy? Is He bound by some incomprehensible cosmic rule that blood must be shed before He can forgive?

A couple of thoughts along this line:

1) More intuitively obvious than bloodshed seems to be the requirement for recognition of the need for forgiveness before forgiveness can be received -- not because God isn't willing or able to give it but because the offender doesn't notice it being offered. If I don't realize that I need to be forgiven, God's offer of forgiveness is simply puzzling to me. Perhaps it takes a wound (to someone or something) deep enough to draw blood to reveal to me how desperately I need forgiveness and prompt me to receive it into my life.

2) Jesus' death brought forgiveness for others. Perhaps the full impact of sin isn't clear to us without seeing the ultimate effects of that sin in putting God Incarnate to a bloody, tortuous death. We weren't in Jerusalem that day, but we have all stood in the place of those who rejected Jesus and called for his death in order to get rid of him.

3) Is there figurative bleeding involved every time we extend forgiveness to others? Do we have to die just a little in order to let go of the wrongs done to us? Does that inner death give us a glimpse of what God sacrifices when He forgives?

I'm not sure there are any firm conclusions here, just some thoughts about the how and why behind this call for "the shedding of blood" in connection with forgiveness.

The "flesh" or the "sinful nature"?

2009-05-01T07:42:00.000-07:00

I print out the scripture for every week's lesson. The lesson exposition uses the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible. Our church has NIV pew Bibles. I don't have a problem using NIV. Usually. This week's lesson is from Romans 8 and Galatians 5. I'm printing it out from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) for one reason - the Greek word sarx. The NIV translates it as "sinful nature" in these passages with "flesh" in the footnotes. The NRSV uses "flesh" in the text. I think the difference is important enough to switch translations.

I'm not sure why the NIV uses "sinful nature," but it opens the door to the idea that we can get rid of that nature. After all, who needs a sinful nature? Cry to God and He will cleanse you of that nature so that you are no longer bothered by it.

It's a little more difficult to put forth the idea of ridding ourselves of "flesh." We live in flesh. We can deny the appetites of our fleshly selves, but if we get rid of our flesh, our life on this earth will be over.

In both these passages, Paul contrasts life according to the flesh/sinful nature with life according to the Spirit. If we talk about the "sinful nature," we are choosing between right and wrong. In theory, we can totally eliminate wrong from our lives, get rid of the sinful nature completely. However, if we stick to the word "flesh," it's easy to see that the pull of the flesh includes legitimate appetites and desires. When my flesh is hungry, I need to eat in order to maintain my health. However, if I am walking in the Spirit, I won't let food become the focus of my life. It's not that I quit eating but that I make a conscious decision when and how much I will eat. The "flesh" doesn't dictate my actions and choices.

Freedom from the "flesh" doesn't mean I no longer have desires and appetites that trace back to my physical body and my human nature. Not only do I need to eat and sleep and maintain body warmth but I also need a sense of significance and value and purpose in life. If I follow the dictates of the "flesh," I will elevate those natural needs and desires to the place where they dictate all my actions. Everything will be about me and my needs. Walking in the Spirit doesn't mean no longer having those needs and desires. It means recognizing them for what they are and looking for legitimate ways to "keep soul and body together" while keeping in step with the Spirit. I am free from the "flesh" in that it no longer controls me.

By the grace of God -- when I am at my best -- I choose to deny the self-focus that tugs at me and make deliberate choices that glorify God and edify those around me. I feed my body what it needs without letting food become my focus in life. Similarly, I find personal value and significance in being loved by God and then focus on those around me without further concern for myself.

This is good stuff we're studying here. I think the "flesh" part of it is important.

Be holy as I am holy.

2009-04-23T06:40:00.000-07:00

A speaker I heard recently said, "I fear in the postmodern world that we will have relevance without reverence, application without awe." Connecting such a fear to postmodernity puzzled me. Hasn't relevance been the goal of those doing ministry to baby boomers? Wasn't application a specialty of the holiness movement a century ago? Look at the music to see the emphasis. The gospel songs from 100 years ago are testimonies to what is happening in 'my' life.

"I've found a friend in Jesus. He's everything to me. He's the lily of the valley to my soul."

"He brought me out of the miry clay."

"Once I was bound by sin's galling fetters, chained like a slave I struggled in vain... Glorious freedom, wonderful freedom, no more in chains of sin I repine."

"Living by faith, in Jesus alone."

God was the means by which sunshine arrived in my soul. The songs revolved around what salvation/sanctification did for me.

Moving up to the 1970s, we have big spiral-bound books of music dealing with the second coming of Christ, the little flowers who never worry, admonitions to "consider the lily," celebrations of feeling at home in the presence of Jesus, being part of the family of God. Where is the awe? Where the reverence?

It seems to me that the top 25 worship songs today stand in stark contrast in their focus on God Almighty -- "How Great Is Our God," "Holy Is the Lord," "Lord, I Lift Your Name on High," "You Are My King," "God of Wonders," "How Great Thou Art."

Oops. That last one, although it is on the current top 25 list at CCLI, was actually written in 1953. How fitting that the two songs on the list coming to us from previous generations -- "How Great Thou Art" and "Amazing Grace (My Chains Are Gone)" -- are songs that glorify the greatness of God and His grace.

I'm puzzled as to why the eminent speaker I heard linked a lack of awe and reverence with postmodernity. It disturbs me in that there are plenty of legitimate concerns connected with postmodernity without voicing fear in this area. I think losing sight of the transcendence and majesty of God is a danger in every generation. That danger is always worth keeping in mind. Still, it seems that for now the pendulum has swung more toward the opposite danger of viewing God Almighty as watching us from on high, "from a distance," and not necessarily involved in our daily lives at an intimate level.

This week's WordAction lesson calls us to "Be holy as [God] is holy." Part of the challenge of that statement is to recognize that the holiness of God is part of His transcendence, putting Him far beyond us, and yet to accept the commandment to be holy as humans in a way that reflects the unreachable holiness of God. It's an interesting challenge.

Sin -- strictly speaking

2009-03-18T06:58:00.000-07:00

Sin popped up in last week's discussion and threatened to take over. Are we sinners or not? Can we live without sin? Can we claim to be sinless?

I wasn't ready to discuss it last week. This week it is part of the lesson exposition from 1 John 3. It's a delicate topic. There are landmines here.

The first challenge is to define sin. Some define it as any thought or deed that falls short of the best practices we know. By that definition, we are all guilty and can approach God only by way of grace. It's not a terrible viewpoint, but it leaves sin as inescapable. Acts of sin, followed by confession, repentance, and forgiveness become a never-ending exercise for Christians in this view.

In contrast, the Wesleyan definition of sin brings in an element of purposeful rebellion. In the oft-quoted words of John Wesley, sin is a "voluntary transgression of a known law of God." In this view, I know it's wrong and I choose to do it anyway. I see the line in the sand and deliberately stick my big toe over it. Wesleyans promote the belief that there is a place of freedom where we no longer have rebellion stirring in our hearts, where we are content to accept God's boundaries and no longer struggle against them. There is value in this view of sin. It tells us about freedom and the possibility of walking in daily unbroken communion with God.

The difficulties come when Wesleyans start to flesh out the face of sin. Is it a sin to dance? to watch certain movies or television shows? to smoke? to drink alcoholic beverages? to lie? to shop on Sunday? to eat enough to become and remain obese in a world where others starve? to gamble? to dress immodestly? to break the speed limit? What is the "known law of God" in these areas? Can we truly get it all right and avoid all the things on the list that we decide are sins? If we avoid all those things will we be sinless?

Part of what we're missing is the rest of the Wesley quotation:

Nothing is sin, strictly speaking, but a voluntary transgression of a known law of God. Therefore every voluntary breach of the law of love is sin; and nothing else, if we speak properly... Let love fill your heart, and it is enough.

If we take this fuller definition back to our list of possible sins, it makes the answers both easier and more difficult. To take one example, is gambling a voluntary breach of the law of love? It takes some serious scrutiny to answer that question as we contemplate all of the possible ways in which gambling could hurt those around us. Are we voluntarily breaching the law of love toward God and/or others when we walk into a casino with a roll of quarters? There's definite room for discussion here.

But why are we discussing gambling when we made a cutting remark to a family member before we left the house this morning? when we took steps to protect our own interests at the expense of our coworkers' interests? when we ignore the hurting people around us? when we build social groups that shut people out instead of inviting them in? If all it takes to sin is being rude when we have the capacity to be kind, we have a lot bigger problem to deal with than the gambling industry. Even believing that God can enable me to be kind when I have the capacity to make that choice isn't helpful. How much of my impatience with people is a voluntary decision to rebel against the law of love as opposed to being a sign that my resources are exhausted and I am unable to choose patience? If my irritation isn't a voluntary act of rebellion against the law of love, where does all this leave me?

That is the real question. Can the work of God in our lives enable us to escape our self-concern and live within the law of love? Can God give us the resources to be consistently kind in situations that have always exhausted our patience?

To me, the Wesleyan answer is that we will never exhaust the possibilities for what God can do in our lives. There will always be one more step to take to become more loving. And it is always possible to take that step in the grace and power of God. The possibilities are beyond imagination. I can look back and marvel at the progress I have made by the grace of God and then look ahead in anticipation for where tomorrow will take me.

Can we live without rebelling against God? Yes! When we place ourselves totally in His hands, we can lie still and let Him shape us as He will. And even though there's always more molding to do and we are never finished in this life, our submission to the process will delight Him. We can rest in His goodness and allow Him to teach us how to live in loving ways. Where we are is good; His grace covers our imperfections. And yet, we continually strive to go further in and up. There is more than we have yet discovered!

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. - 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 (NIV)

1 John 2:18, 22 - The Antichrist

2009-03-12T06:12:00.000-07:00

Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist -- he denies the Father and the Son.

"I like Jesus, but I don't like God." These are the words of a child who knows "Jesus loves me" and has seen the pictures of Jesus with children or carrying a little lamb back to safety. Jesus is kind and loving. In contrast, in this childish view, God is a wrathful judge, ready to wipe out entire nations and send sinners into everlasting fire. This is the God who rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19), who sent plagues and death on those who challenged His authority, who sent prophets to warn of judgment to come and then executed that judgment. This is an unapproachable, angry deity. There's not much about this God to love.

That is, there's not much to love unless you're a Pharisee and have managed to get on the good side of this angry God. If you can manage that, there is power to be had. You can support this angry, vengeful God from the sidelines while He punishes sinners. You can celebrate every misfortune that strikes those less pious than you as a sign that God is still in the smiting business. You can even be his henchman (within legal limits, of course), helping God with the smiting. If you're a Pharisee and someone comes along who says he is God's representative in the world, God's Son even, but hangs out with sinners and doesn't follow your carefully crafted rules for staying on God's good side, you can recognize him as a fraud. When you say, "This man cannot be the Christ because he is nothing like the righteous God we know and love," what you are really saying is, "I don't believe that God is compassionate and kind. I don't believe that He loves sinners. This man cannot be the Christ because, if he does indeed represent God as he claims, it's not the God I know."

To deny that Jesus is the Christ, the anointed Son of God, is to elevate an image of God that doesn't fit with the life and teachings of Jesus. In rejecting Jesus as the Son, one rejects God as a loving, compassionate Father, full of grace and healing.

This week's scripture speaks of the antichrist, the person who is against the idea that Jesus is the Christ, the divine Son of God. Such a denial shows that the speaker doesn't know God well enough to recognize Jesus as the manifestation of the nature of God. The lesson to be learned is that any time there is a gap between our perception of Jesus and our perception of the Father, we know that there is a misperception somewhere. To deny that Jesus is a perfect representation of God made flesh is to fill the role of the antichrist, whether we are saying that Jesus isn't as righteous and holy as God is or that God isn't as compassionate and loving as Jesus was.

Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."

Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father living in me, who is doing his work" (John 14:8-10)

1 John 2:6 - How did Jesus walk?

2009-03-01T18:04:00.000-08:00

Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did (1 John 2:6).

I love this verse. It boils the whole idea of being a Christian (i.e., a follower of Jesus Christ) down to one thing: following the example of Jesus, walking as he walked. All we have to do is find out how Jesus walked and emulate his example.

The days of the WWJD (What Would Jesus Do?) bracelet are mostly past for now. They traced back to Charles Sheldon's book In His Stepsfrom 1896, a novel following a group of people who were challenged to ask themselves the "What would Jesus do?" question as they went about their days. The 1990s saw a resurgence of interest in the book and a plethora of products designed to once again remind people to ask the question.

I'm not sure, however, the WWJD fad translated well into people devoting themselves the actual record of how Jesus walked. Saying that one wants to do what Jesus would do and applying some notion of what that means doesn't necessarily equate to thorough exposure to the message of the Gospels.

There seems to be two approaches to the question of how Jesus walked. One approach produces a list of what Jesus would and would not do. For example, He would be courteous to others and a diligent worker. He wouldn't do drugs or have sex before marriage. It tells us how to be good, but it falls far short of exposing us to the radical ideas of the Gospels.

The other approach isn't nearly so neat and clean. It requires reading and studying the accounts of Jesus' life and letting His teaching both by words and example saturate our lives and change us. I read the Gospels through every year, taking the entire year to do so. And I am still regularly surprised by what I find in them. The how-to-be-good lists don't come close. I have no fear of exhausting in a lifetime the breadth and depth of the lessons to be learned.

What a worthy goal John presents here -- to walk as Jesus walked. Getting there takes a lifetime and is well worth the investment.

1 John 1:7

2009-02-22T19:28:00.000-08:00

I tend to be a mathematical thinker -- linear, logical, analyzing the known to discover the unknown. The logical process behind computer programming fits me.

One of the most useful programming commands is the if/then statement. If A is true then do B (or go to C, or delete D). Everything depends on A being true. IF A is true, the THEN is automatically executed.

There are several if/then statements in the Bible. I like them. They speak to me.

John 15:7 -- "IF a man remains in me and I in him, [THEN] he will bear much fruit."

So if we want fruit, the key is to "remain" in Christ. The remaining is the action required to trigger the fruit-bearing, which is a natural byproduct. If we want fruit, we must focus, not on straining to push out some fruit blossoms, but on remaining in the vine.

Acts 1:8 -- "You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses ...

It's not a command to be witnesses; it's not even presented as a choice to be witnesses. Rather, it's an if/then statement. If (when) the Holy Spirit comes on us, then we WILL receive power and be witnesses.

Of course, there remains the work of figuring out what it means to "remain" and what the process is to have the Holy Spirit come on us, but recognizing the if/then nature of these verses helps us to focus our efforts on the IF, knowing that the THEN will take care of itself.

This week's scripture passage from the first chapter of 1 John has several if/then statements. My favorite is the beginning of verse 7:

"If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another..."

We could paraphrase John here as saying: Are you looking for friends? Would you like to enjoy true fellowship with other believers? Here's the secret: Walk in the light as God is in the light.

But what does it mean to walk in the light? That becomes our question. There's much room for exploration here. One aspect of light is that it reveals things that would be hidden by darkness. Perhaps one requirement for fellowship is the courage to let people see us as we are.

What do you think?

1 Corinthians

2009-02-20T19:54:00.001-08:00

We're finishing up a series of lessons from 1 Corinthians this Sunday. Where I am, we're actually a week behind and will skip the last lesson in order to stay with the curriculum calendar. The passage that slipped into a second week concerned disagreements within the Christian community as addressed in 1 Corinthians 6. I wasn't there for the first week's discussion which the clock cut short. The second week involved some "rubber meets the road" questions. Does the church really want to deal with business deals gone sour between members? How do we balance charity toward even our enemy with our responsibility to spare others the harm our enemy has done us? If we continue to distrust someone who has wronged us, does that mean we haven't forgiven them? It made for some interesting discussion.

That puts us in chapter 8 this week, dealing with meat that has been sacrificed to idols. I haven't seen any of that in the marketplace lately. It will be interesting to figure out what analogies we can draw with today's marketplace.

Sheep and goats and postmodernity

2008-11-22T16:41:00.000-08:00

After a break, we're back on the "regular curriculum" for a while. Tomorrow's topic is the parable of the sheep and the goats from Matthew 25. These are good lessons. For the most part I find them quite profitable. This week, however, amidst the good stuff, the preparer of the "methodology" took a couple of potshots at postmodernity.

The first comment is overt:

There is finality here in the idea of "judgment." That Jesus means to emphasize this as "final judgment" is evident by the immediate action of the King dividing the sheep from the goats.
* How would today's "politically correct" society handle such a distinction? (The politically correct, postmodern person would deem it unfair to judge another person's thoughts or actions.)

This makes me smile.

The King divides the sheep from the goats. How would sheep (or goats) who decline to label others as either sheep or goats feel about the King applying such labels in all His wisdom and perfect knowledge? Is this the question?

Why is it that those who attempt to discredit postmodernity consistently misrepresent it? As far as I know, postmodernity says nothing about the ultimate right of God to judge humanity. It is concerned with human relationships. I don't see any of the sheep or goats assisting with the sorting process here. But maybe I'm missing something.

The second reference is more subtle but still makes me smile.

Eternal fire is prepared for the devil and his angels. How would you respond to someone who says that the devil does not exist?

Aha! Here we have the perfect response for the pesky doubters among us. Simply pull out Matthew 25:41 and give them absolute prove that, since eternal fire has been prepared for the devil and his angels, their existence cannot be questioned. After all, that's where the goats are going. But only goats, right? Not people. Let's see ... no people are mentioned in this passage, right? Right. Only sheep and goats.

What's that? You say the sheep and goats represent people? So is this passage not to be taken literally? Ah, but the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels is totally literal. Beyond doubt. And can be used to prove their existence to those who have doubts.

I'll keep this in mind, but I fear that the pesky doubters I know will not be so easily convinced.

Just a couple of points that amused me, but certainly not a criticism of the lesson as a whole. Now the question is: Can I resist sharing that amusement tomorrow morning?

In all things ...

2008-08-25T18:27:00.000-07:00

I have a "spiritual adventure" book by David Mains that talks about "God sightings" -- coincidences that seem to obviously reveal God at work in our lives. I don't use that phrase much but it certainly came to mind today.

Yesterday morning in Sunday School, we barely touched Romans 8:28. It was after the final buzzer when I brought it up and briefly mentioned a personal example of how God works for good in all things. My example was of how having an older member of my family go to prison for the last few years of his life was obviously a tragic thing, but how God has used that tragedy for good in multiple ways in my life.

That was Sunday. This morning, I was gathering up house clutter and sat down with a newspaper over a week old that had joined the clutter without being read. The headline announced that a classmate of my older daughter had been sentenced to 10 years in prison. This was a result of an accident over two years ago involving a truck, an Amish buggy, and a .24 blood-alcohol content which resulted in one death and multiple injuries. It's a sad, sad situation within the Mennonite-Amish community that packed out the courtroom for the sentencing hearing. The article indicated that there were few dry eyes in the courtroom. Tears ran down my own face as I read it.

A couple of hours later, I headed to the post office to mail out a textbook my younger daughter sold over the internet. As I chatted with the postal worker, someone came through the door behind me. I turned around to leave and there was the mother of the young man from the article. I live in a small town, but that's pretty coincidental. Our paths have crossed only two or three times since the accident. I know her because we did volunteer work together 18 years ago when our children were in grade school, but we haven't gone beyond exchanging greetings more than a dozen times since then. Yet, here she was in the post office just a couple of hours after I came across the latest news about her son.

Now, you may think me tactless, but there is absolutely no gentle way to bring up something like this and I didn't want to pretend I was unaware of this latest development, so I simply said, "Well, hi! I was just reading about you in the newspaper this morning!" She acknowledged that the family had become local "celebrities" against their druthers. I then asked some questions and mentioned my own family's experience with being on the wrong side of the law. We moved out onto the sidewalk in front of the post office and talked several minutes more. It was good to share someone else's burden. I know one of the things that helped me most during my own experience was finding people who weren't afraid to talk about it with me. There's nothing to kill a conversation like mentioning what happened at last week's prison visit. I hope and pray that offering a listening ear was a blessing to this mother like it was to me.

As we both went on our way, it occurred to me that tomorrow marks nine years since prisoner #963602 moved out of the prison walls and on to sentencing at the hands of a merciful God. I had been totally oblivious to that impending anniversary.

And yet ... "in all things God works for ... good" I can truly say that there was good along that path. How odd that I mentioned that personal history in Sunday School yesterday, that I picked up that particular piece of "old news" this morning, and that my brief visit to the post office placed me square in the path of this grieving mother almost exactly nine years after death brought my own "prison experience" to an end. It seems that I may have had a "God sighting."

Romans

2008-07-26T05:08:00.000-07:00

It has been a while since I have posted here. We have traveled with Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph. We have interviewed some of the most influential people in church history. I have studied and prepared lessons and hung out with some absolutely wonderful people. What I haven't done is write blog entries about the experience.

Now we're ready to study Romans. Long letter. Weighty material. Romans was a Bible quizzing book for me, the enduring result of which is to give me a mental outline of the book. We have six lessons from the core of the book: chapters 5 to 8. Chapter 5 starts off with wonderful news - peace with God! We're skipping that part and diving into the sin and death problem which is offset by the righteousness and life solution in Christ Jesus.

I could spend hours and hours reading commentaries on Romans. Even the lesson material has more commentary beyond the exposition than usual. I have a brand-new unopened commentary on Romans. I have an old, musty unopened commentary on Romans. How much time do I want to spend following others through Romans? How much stuff must fill my own mind before I try to lead a discussion on Romans? Is it a hindrance or help to have tons of information stuffed into my head before going into such a discussion?

Why do I always have more questions than answers?

Mopping floors/washing feet

2008-04-10T12:04:00.000-07:00

This week's WordAction lesson includes the passage from John 13 where Jesus washes his disciples' feet. I'm thinking about playing a snippet from the movie "Bruce Almighty" where "God" is mopping floors.

I might never have watched "Bruce Almighty" if not for Joan Ryan. I don't watch a lot of movies and this one wouldn't be likely to be among those few for several reasons.

However, I saw this article on the editorial page of my local newspaper back when the movie was still in the theaters and my interest was piqued.

Here is an excerpt, but I encourage you to read the entire column to get the full message:

When I left the movie theater, Morgan Freeman's God followed me home. I have an on-again, off-again relationship with God, mostly because the invisible thing doesn't work for me. Faith isn't my strength. I get stuck on needing proof, fully realizing that proof negates the need for faith (a twisty argument that eventually gives me a headache).

Morgan Freeman's God, however, is God as I want to imagine him. He is the parent we wanted and want to be. He speaks softly and not too much. He smiles with both amusement and affection. He is patient enough to let you make the mistakes you need to make. He never scolds. He knows everything about you -- even all your dark crabby thoughts about friends who are way thinner and less wrinkly than you are -- and still makes you feel as if He did his best work in putting all your weird little pieces together....

I almost forgot my favorite part about Morgan Freeman as God. He appears to Bruce in the guise of a janitor. He is wearing one of those jumpsuits. He has a mop and a bucket. He asks Bruce to mop with him. It is a vast empty floor, a big job for one mopper. Bruce declines in the beginning. But later, after his epiphany, Bruce picks up a mop, and he and God mop together, one narrow strip of floor at a time.

I am still captured by the image presented in that movie and how closely it fits with the God I know. I think it really does reflect the God of the Bible. I suspect that I would enjoy getting acquainted with the writer of the screenplay for that movie.

Why evangelize?

2008-03-03T07:38:00.000-08:00

From the WordAction lesson for March 2:

But what of those who have never heard the gospel message? Though God in His wisdom, justice, and love will judge humanity according to the light they have received, that fact does not absolve us of our obligation to take the gospel message to the whole world. Not only is eternity involved, but the quality of life on earth as well. The pagans are the "whoevers" who must be given the opportunity to know the truth and accept salvation.

Absolve. Obligation. Must. These are words of duty generally directed toward those with a resistance to doing what they need to do. While I don't disagree with what the author is saying, I wouldn't bring duty into the discussion.

"But what of those who have never heard the gospel message?" Can they find their way to God? Yes, according to Romans 1:19-20. Nature gives enough witness to the existence of God and His will for mankind for people to choose the path of righteousness. Those who fail to choose that path are without excuse.

Still, why would we leave someone groping about in the dark when we have a limitless supply of light? It's not that we have a duty to spend our days wearily passing out flashlights and batteries to the endless line of people living in the dark. We have light! We have the secret of abundant life!

Do I have a duty to share my faith with people who are interested in spiritual things but haven't heard the good news of how Jesus Christ has opened up a wonderful path into a relationship with God? I suppose I do, but I don't see it in those terms.

It is difficult to share physical resources as a rich Christian in a hungry world. How do I share what I have while encouraging people to develop independence and responsibility. Where do I start in the face of such overwhelming need and limited resources to meet that need? How do I make sure my gift reaches needy people? It's easier to simply turn my face away from people who need monetary or physical help. Perhaps there is a requirement for language of duty in this area.

However, in terms of faith, why would I not want to share what I have? It's not as though there's a limited amount of light. There's no reason to hoard it. There are people all over the world -- in my immediate world, in places far and near -- who are hungry to hear words of hope. I have those words. They burst out of me when I detect that I'm talking to a receptive soul. I want to enable others to go where I cannot in order to share that message of hope.

Are we obligated to offer light and hope to those who are trying to find their way to God in the dark? Yes. Just as we are obligated to tell people planning a vacation about the marvelous time we had on our last trip to their destination. Or in the same way that we are obligated to share our most delicious dining experiences with someone looking for a good restaurant.

It seems a bit pointless to talk about duty and obligation to share something so wonderful and amazing that we want the entire world to hear about it.

Second-Mile living - 12/30/07

2007-12-27T10:13:00.000-08:00

I'm back. For now, at least.

This week's lesson includes the following comment from Illustrated Bible Life by Jirair Tashjian:

"This is not the same as being a doormat. Nor is it that enemies are made into friends by 'killing them with kindness.' It is, rather, peaceful resistance. It puts enemies into the awkward situation of having to face kindness when retaliation was expected."

I like the last line. And I've heard the first line all of my life. However, I have yet to accept it as an obvious truth. And I'm not moving that direction.

In her book Out of the Saltshaker, Rebecca Manley Pippert tells the story of how she challenged an agnostic student to read the Gospels and try obedience to see what would happen. The student read Matthew 5:38-42 and promised the God whose existence she doubted that, given the opportunity, she would try it. It didn't take long for the opportunity to present itself. Paying the cost to obey brought a complete change to her life.

As I contemplated that story, I realized that I and most everyone I know had accepted the "we can't be doormats" philosophy without even trying it to see what would happen. If an agnostic college student could try out obedience, why couldn't I? So I signed on to do my very best to obey the instructions from the Sermon on the Mount. But only for fifty years. Then I would evaluate the results and see if I wanted to continue the experiment.

I'm still not sure how second-mile living really works out in real life. I seem incapable of sustaining my position as a doormat. It's rare when I can cheerfully offer the second mile on top of the first one that has been demanded of me. Or offer up the other cheek when the first one is still stinging. However, what little data I have managed to collect indicates that non-resistance is actually far more rewarding than defending one's rights.

People don't walk over me any more when I'm lying still than when I'm squealing in protest. Nor do they notice me any less. Rather, passive living seems attractive to those who are observing how I respond to an abuser. And there's the bonus of feeling completely triumphant when I manage to lie still and allow someone to walk over me without protest. It's not weakness. It's strength under control. It's a choice to keep silent in the face of insult and abuse. When I can manage to pull it off, there's no lack of personal affirmation in it.

Fortunately, I have a few years left to continue my experiment and see if I can get any better at it. I'm not bleeding yet.

Sunday School issues

2007-01-14T19:54:00.000-08:00

OK, there are still one or two people stopping by here, so I guess it's time for an update. Discussing "issues" in Sunday School has been an interesting exercise. I never thought I would address "current event" topics by choice. For the most part, I don't bother to choose a side on controversial issues. After all, does it really matter what I think? There are enough decisions to be made in areas where I need to choose a course of action that I don't have the mental energy to decide whether we should have troups in Iraq and who should have tried Suddam Hussein and whether Terri Schiavo should have been allowed to die.

In a way, my lack of mental and emotional investment in the subjects we've been discussing has made it easier. If people have strong opinions, on capital punishment for example, either pro or con, that's fine with me. They can go ahead and express their opinion. I'll probably be in at least partial agreement with any position. But for the most part, we simply look at both sides of the issue in light of scripture. After all, if there were a simple Bible-based answer to the issues facing our world, they wouldn't be issues. We've yet to find an issue where all Bible-believing Christians line up on the same side.

Our next topic is bioethics -- cloning, gene therapy, genetic engineering. It's another area where I've never seen any need to choose a position. Hopefully, someone else will have something to contribute to the discussion. Anyone who reads this is welcome to comment.

God and Country

2006-12-09T19:11:00.000-08:00

OK, so no one responded to my short and pithy questions last week. Getting a dialog going here is even harder than on Sunday mornings at Sunday School. I guess you are all just peeping in to see what's going on.

So here's what is going on this week: God and country. What does it mean to be an American Christian? What does it mean to be a Christian American? What is our allegiance as Christians to the United States of America? How does Christianity affect our view of those outside our borders? Does the Bible give us any answers to these questions?

I'd tell you the answers, but I need to wait until after tomorrow (Sunday) morning to see if we figure out what they are.

Legislating morality

2006-11-30T19:44:00.000-08:00

So can the government force morality on the citizens it governs by passing laws that make immorality illegal and subject to fines and punishments? That's what we'll be discussing this week. Anyone care to comment? Anyone anywhere? Hellooooooo? Is anyone out there? Anyone at all?

Where do we go from here?

2006-11-26T04:49:00.000-08:00

Our last week in 1 Thessalonians. It has been a challenging unit.

Last Sunday morning we started with the question: "If someone asks you ... What does the Bible say about ___________? ... how do they fill in the blank?" The rhetorical answer was "the end of the world" in order to transition into the 2nd coming aspect of the lesson from 1 Thessolonians 4-5. The actual responses, however, resulted in a decision to take a look at some of the questions people ask us about the Bible and what the Bible really says about those issues. So we won't be using the WordAction curriculum for the winter quarter.

I'm starting to dig out books on issues from the Dialog series. It's interesting that the book from the church library with the closest match to the issues brought up last week is the oldest. It's not actually from the Dialog Series or even the Nazarene Publishing House. I suspect it predates the Dialog Series. It's from the "Contemporary Discussion Series" from Baker Book House and the copyright date is 1969. The subjects addressed include: gambling, social responsibility, abortion, the threat of technology, modesty in dress, and church music.

For today, we're still in 1 Thessalonians, finishing out the end of chapter 5. Verse 23 is a golden text for Nazarenes that has been used as a launching pad for untold promises about "sanctification". The rest of my group hasn't been subjected to nearly so much in that area as I have and I try to be careful to not spend my time reacting to offenses that they haven't encountered. Fortunately, it's not the only verse in this morning's scripture focus.

Holiness and sex

2006-11-10T08:57:00.000-08:00

In 1 Thessalonians 4:3 Paul explains that sanctification is the will of God. The first aspect of sanctification he mentions is avoiding sexual immorality.

There is a universal innate ethic in humanity that tells us that some things are right and others are wrong. I assume that studies have been done to determine what activities jar the sensitive conscience in every culture. Taking what belongs to and is treasured by another might be an example of a universal ‘wrong’. I don’t know. I haven’t reviewed such studies.

This week’s lesson indicates that in the culture of the Thessalonians, sexual indulgence was considered ‘normal’, acceptable, even sacred. Paul has explained to the believers there that this is not the case, that doing what is right in the sight of God includes being sexually pure. Now he’s reminding them of this teaching.

I wonder: Is sexual morality part of our built-in moral system or is it defined by culture? Were the pagans in Thessalonica aware at some level that their sexual indulgence was wrong? Or did they consider it simply satisfying a natural physical hunger with no more moral significance than eating an apple?

Unlike swans, humans do not have a natural fidelity to a single, lifetime mate. Rather, there is an inclination to be promiscuous, to consider every attractive member of the opposite sex (or even the same sex) to have potential as a sexual partner, even after having committed oneself to marriage. How universal is the moral call to do right by denying that natural inclination? Was Paul bringing the Thessalonian Christians back to a known but suppressed moral standard or was he introducing a completely foreign moral code with no natural support even by the sensitized conscience?

Perhaps we could find the answer in sociology. Or maybe sexual morality is actually an extension of love and needs no separate code to define it. Love directs us to value others and seek their highest welfare. Sexual indulgence uses others without valuing them. Someone with two partners sets them in competition with each other, both vying for the undivided attention of the beloved. Even if those partners don’t know about each other, the person whose bed they share is depriving his or her lovers of pure (unadulterated) love. It seems that true love for others would naturally and necessarily lead to sexual purity, to imposing self-control on natural urges out of concern for the happiness and well-being of others, both one's marriage partner (present or future) and the attractive and available person. It seems that Paul was connecting dots for the new believers that would have naturally come together for them over time.

God is holy; God is love. Being holy, set apart, sanctified, means loving God and loving others. This leads inevitably to sexual purity, controlling and channeling our urges to procreate into committed and exclusive relationships.

What do you think?

Running behind

2006-11-05T13:12:00.000-08:00

My goal for this blog is to comment on upcoming lessons from the adult WordAction curriculum rather than past lessons. However, this past week (1) life didn't provide much time for composing blog entries (2) I had difficulty getting a handle on the lesson. I hope to do better this week.

I did want to make a couple of a posthumous comments on today's (Nov 5) lesson. I use the term posthumous because I feel like I pretty much sucked the life out of the lesson in my weak attempt to present it. It spoke of the pastoral relationship and I gave in to the ploy of pulling in an illustration of a poor example of pastoring from this week's news. After all, it doesn’t hurt to talk about what people are already talking about in the Sunday School setting where we can approach the discussion from a biblical point of view. However, no one in this morning’s group had heard anything about it, leaving me playing the role of a gossip, revealing the shocking truth of someone else’s sins. I revealed nothing that hasn’t been verified as truth by reliable sources and actually less than is now verified, but I wish I had simply left it alone. Examples of exemplary living would have left a much better taste in my mouth.

Paul amazes me in his confidence that the best life the people in his churches can live is in imitation of the way he and his fellow evangelists live. I’m much more inclined to hope that anyone who might look to me for guidance would listen to the best of the words I say rather than imitating my practices. I know that I have weaknesses that sometimes make me a poor model of Christian living. How would I ever point to myself as an example for others? Rather, my goal is to point people to Jesus as the model for holy living.

I am reminded today of words from one of my favorite DC Talk songs:

Is this one for the people?
Is this one for the Lord?
Or do I simply serenade for things I must afford?
You can jumble them together, my conflict still remains
Holiness is calling, in the midst of courting fame

Cause I see the trust in their eyes
Though the sky is falling
They need your love in their lives
Compromise is calling

(chorus)
What if I stumble, what if I fall?
What if I lose my step and I make fools of us all?
Will the love continue when my walk becomes a crawl?
What if I stumble, and what if I fall?

The Fellowship of Suffering

2006-10-25T15:14:00.000-07:00

I enjoyed Proverbs. Now it’s time to move on to 1 Thessalonians.

Dr. Jesse Middendorf writes in this week’s exposition: "It has always been true: Shared suffering produces deep relationship."

Shared suffering. Suffering together.

Have you ever been part of a discussion that questioned the significance of our lack of persecution in North America as Christians? I get the feeling that getting along well with those outside the faith community is a sign of anemic faith. Yet, I’ve seen "persecuted" American Christians. Their offensiveness seems to have little to do with being devoted disciples of Jesus Christ, living a cruciform lifestyle. Rather, they’re pushing up against the rules, testing the boundaries and then yelling foul when the boundaries push back. Maybe my faith is too anemic to recognize true discipleship, but I have yet to see obnoxiousness on any list of biblical virtues.

So ... if we’re not suffering persecution because of our faith, how do we develop the deep relationships that are byproducts of shared suffering? Perhaps the answer lies in the groaning of the creation around us.

There is no shortage of suffering in this world, even in North America. Perhaps it’s the child next door who seldom hears a kind word. Or the widow whose children are consuming what few resources she has and leaving her destitute. Maybe it’s the teenage girl who is already losing the glow of youth as she seeks for love in all the wrong places. Or the neighbors whose marriage is slowly dying with no visible remedy. Or the man whose beloved wife is wasting away with cancer. Or the family with no steady income about to lose their home. People all around us are in agony as they face crushing circumstances with no means of escape.

I confess that it’s easy for me to back away from people in great pain. Hearing their stories makes me feel like I ought to do something to help them. How can I listen to their pain and then do nothing more than wish them well as I walk away? Yet, what can I do? I can’t cure cancer or reverse death or fix broken relationships or provide financial support for all the poor people I know. Having such limited resources makes me want to cross to the other side when I see hurting people, as did the priest in the story of the good Samaritan.

Perhaps this is where shared suffering comes in. All around us people are in pain. Rather than being related to their faith, it’s often obvious that sin is involved. Yet, here is genuine suffering – broken hearts, frustration, tears, hopelessness. Is this a suffering in which we can share as disciples of Jesus Christ? Isn’t that what he did? He saw a widow walking in the funeral procession of her only son and stopped and got involved. He wouldn’t have had to do that. He was a busy man. He had his own challenges. But he had compassion on the woman and stopped to restore her hope.

We don’t have the same resources Jesus had. Yet, even his were limited by time and space. He couldn’t personally interact with even a fraction of the multitudes of suffering people in Palestine. Sure, he fed 5,000 people – one meal; or maybe two. But they were hungry again a day or two later and where was Jesus? In another place, walking into the suffering of a different set of people.

Perhaps it’s not only suffering for being a Christian that deepens our relationships, but also drawing alongside those who are suffering the consequences of sin or of simply being human and stepping into their agony with them. When Paul wrote in Philippians (3:10) that he wanted to know "the fellowship of sharing in [Christ's] sufferings," could sharing in the sufferings of those around him have been the avenue to fulfilling that desire?

What do you think?

The wisdom of this world

2006-10-20T18:12:00.000-07:00

The apostle Paul wrote:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." (1CO 1:18-19)

Jesus said:

"I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children." (MT 11:25)

And:

"I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." (MT 19:23-24)

Jesus does NOT indicate that it is difficult for those who are wise in the eyes of this world to enter the kingdom, only for those who are rich. Yet, I wonder ... is intelligence and learning as much a barrier to entering the kingdom as riches? It seems that it may be. After all, where does the light of faith burn the brightest? Is it in academic settings? Among scientists? Among philosophers? Or is it among those who study less and have a simple faith? Is it as tempting to rely on superior intellect for understanding of life as it is to rely on riches for security?

Who are the little children to whom the Father reveals the secrets of the kingdom? Is it those with much learning? Or is it those who don't understand many things but who choose to believe God and trust him?

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom,
and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. (PR 9:10)

How many people with strong intellects are willing to set aside their logic and their grasp on reality and embrace the foolishness of the cross where, as Derek Webb puts it, things are upside down?

What looks like weakness can do anything
And what looks like foolishness is understanding
When what is powerful has not come to fight
It looks like you’re going to war
But you lay down your life. (From What Looks Like Love)

How many are willing to ‘buy into’ the precepts of God and start with the fear of the Lord in order to pursue and find true wisdom? How many will set aside what they have learned with their heads in order to start thinking with their hearts? How can we open doors for the intelligent into the wisdom of God which sometimes looks so very foolish? Should we expect the church to include few who are “wise by human standards”? (see 1 CO 1:26) Is there a way to minister effectively to the educated among us, to those who have confidence in their intellect to reveal the ways of this world to them?

What do you think?

Good versus Evil

2006-10-13T10:43:00.000-07:00

I mentioned a couple of weeks ago when considering the nature of the poor among us that good and evil seem so much easier to sort out in stories about oppressed poor people than in real life. Actually, it doesn’t take poverty to complicate the division between good and evil in our day-to-day lives.

The Proverbs (and Psalms) speak often of the reward of righteous living and the ultimate destruction of evildoers. The world seems to be divided easily into good and evil in these passages. In Matthew 25, Jesus speaks of the “sheep” and “goats” being divided at the end of the age. Again, the split seems so clean from the viewpoint of the King. However, the righteous and unrighteous are both surprised by the acts assigned to them. It seems that the division between good and evil that is so easily made by our Lord is not nearly so obvious to the casual human observer.

Drama reflects the division of good and evil. I don’t watch much television. Sometimes if I happen by when my husband has the TV on, I’ll stop and watch for a while. Of course, I’m coming into the middle of the story, which prompts me to occasionally ask annoying questions such as, “Is he a good guy or a bad guy? Are we supposed to like him?” It’s not often that the reply is ambiguous. Once in a while there’s a complex character that isn’t easily identified as either good or bad, but those are exceptions.

I find it interesting that we so easily accept the presence of villains in drama, whether they’re oppressing the poor or plotting murder. Do we observe such people in our daily lives? How many of your acquaintances would you classify as bloodthirsty? Do you know anyone who fits the label of murderous?

The evildoer in this week’s passage has characteristics such as concealing his sins, hardening his heart, lacking judgment, and being unconcerned about justice for the poor. I can certainly think of people who fit that description at times. I might slip in there somewhere myself from time to time. However, many of the people I know who sometimes speak harshly and hurt others and harden their hearts toward people don’t fit the “bad guy” image of drama well at all. Many times they are just ordinary people who are “out of sorts” for some reason.

An elderly man of my acquaintance is rude and demanding. He’s much more concerned about justice for himself than for the poor or anyone else. Any cordial words that come out of his mouth seem designed to bend the will of those around him to meet his needs. As far as I can tell he doesn’t have many friends and my natural inclination certainly wouldn’t lead me to number myself among the few. I’m polite to him if I can’t avoid him, but I prefer to avoid him and save myself the bother of trying to be patient with his manipulative demands. Is this an evildoer? He certainly wouldn’t take kindly to being characterized as such. In fact, he told me just recently that he is a Christian.

I often observe parents speaking harshly to their young children. The child is crying and the impatient parent responds with unkind words and threats as to what will happen if the tears do not stop. I observe no compassion toward the little one, only a hard face. Are these evildoers? Hardness of heart and harsh words directed toward innocent little children is surely one of the worst examples of unkindness, yet how many parents can claim to be innocent in this area?

I meet few people who readily confess their failures. Most seem to prefer to put on the best face possible and conceal their darker side. Are these evildoers?

I can’t tell that compassion and vulnerability and good judgment are more prevalent among those who claim to be righteous or that hardness of heart and disregard for the poor and innocent victims is any less evident in the church than elsewhere.

Until we find a surefire way to distinguish the good from the evil, maybe we can fall back on Romans 3:10, where Paul reminds us that “There is no one righteous, not even one.” Rather than attempt to classify ourselves among the exceptionally righteous, maybe we need to admit that we sometimes fall into the characteristics of the wicked and experience the consequences of wrongdoing. When we harden our hearts toward the poor and oppressed, we can expect the natural consequences for such an attitude as revealed in scripture.

What do you think?

The delight of the Lord

2006-10-04T15:35:00.000-07:00

Proverbs 11:1 reads:

The LORD abhors dishonest scales,
but accurate weights are his delight.

The delight of the LORD. You don’t hear much about that. Or at least I don’t. There’s the fear of the LORD, the wrath of the LORD, the justice and righteousness of the LORD. There are things that are an abomination to the LORD. On the other side, the LORD is loving, kind, compassionate, and faithful. But delighted? What sorts of things delight the LORD? Are there other things, besides accurate weights, that bring joy and pleasure to the heart of God?

Psalm 147:10 tells us what does not delight God:

His pleasure is not in the strength of the horse,
nor his delight in the legs of a man;

The next verse tells us what does delight Him:

the LORD delights in those who fear him,
who put their hope in his unfailing love.

Do we delight the LORD God Almighty? Can we delight Him?

It certainly seems that it is possible. All we have to do is revere and trust Him.

So do we? Is God delighted with many of us? Does He rejoice when we turn our faces toward Him and come into His presence?

One of my favorite verses is Psalm 25:14:

The LORD confides in those who fear him;
he makes his covenant known to them.

I can see the picture – mighty king and lowly servant walking down the road together. The king draws up close to the servant and, lowering his voice, shares what he is thinking with him. O to be that servant, to find such a bond with my King, to be the one of whom it is said:

He will take great delight in you,
he will quiet you with his love,
he will rejoice over you with singing." (Zephaniah 3:17)

A song has been stuck in my head today. One line says, "... keep me so close to you that I feel the throb of the great heart of God..." That requires a close proximity, a delight in being together.

We’re often reminded by those who exhort us to draw closer to God of how far we fall short of his glory. I wish I could find a George MacDonald quote I vaguely remember about how God is never satisfied but easily pleased. Here’s the closest I can come with an internet search:

That no obedience but a perfect one will satisfy God, I hold with all my heart and strength; but that there is none else that He cares for, is one of the lies of the enemy. What father is not pleased with the first tottering attempt of his little one to walk? What father would be satisfied with anything but the manly step of the full-grown son?

Yes, I often stumble and fall. I am a child. But as I get back up and try again, as I trust my Father and hold Him in full reverence, as I seek integrity in my business dealings, I rejoice in these verses that hold out the possibility of being a delight to the LORD, even before I reach full maturity.

The poor among us

2006-09-28T09:04:00.000-07:00

Have you watched the Disney animated version of “Robin Hood”? The handsome and debonair hero, a fox, follows the classic pattern of robbing the rich to give to the poor. And we get to meet the poor of Nottingham: the honest laborer with a broken leg; and the “widder lady” with her three well-behaved young bunnies. If we consider the matter at all, we can figure out why these people are poor. They don’t have the means to adequately support themselves and their families. The sheriff who takes what little they have to add to the coffers of Prince John is a villain worthy of the title.

Good and evil are so easy to sort out in such stories. The poor are honest, decent, hard-working folk under the oppression of the greedy and cold-hearted rich and powerful. It’s easy to see this same divide in Proverbs, where the rich and powerful are warned that God himself will take up for the poor.

If only life were so simple. Have you seen the faces of the poor in your community? If you have, you may wonder if everyone living in poverty is as decent, honest, and hard-working as the citizens of Nottingham. Are they poor because they have no path out of poverty or because they are disinclined to follow a path that requires perseverance and hard work? Have they discovered that surviving on handouts is easier and more pleasant than working?

Who “plunders the poor” (see Proverbs 22:23) in our society? Is it the faceless tax-collecting government agencies? Is it the equally faceless banks who foreclose on unpaid mortgages? Is it states who foster the belief among those who have little that a lottery ticket is their best route to financial freedom? Is it us?

If we listen long to advocates for the global poor, we will hear about poor labor conditions in developing nations where large companies take advantage of the poor by giving them low-paying jobs in unhealthy work environments. We’re urged to demand that such businesses change their ways. So how should that affect our shopping decisions? When choosing between a pair of athletic shoes made by an oppressed worker in China and one of equal quality for more money made by a union laborer in Cleveland, what is the best stewardship of our resources? How do we know as we examine the shoes whether the Chinese worker is oppressed or blessed by the opportunity to exchange hard work for money? How do we know that the Cleveland worker isn’t somehow being oppressed by his/her employer? How much research are we obliged to do into the companies behind the goods we buy? Can we trust those who would do our research for us? If we looked at the same data they have and talked to the people involved, would we draw the same conclusions they do?

“The poor you will always have with you...” (Matthew 26:11). What keeps them in poverty and how can we best help them out rather than tighten the chains around them? Are they oppressed or lazy? Are they in need of charity or of healing and a push toward responsibility and self-sufficiency? How do we make sure our charity is a boost out of poverty rather than enabling those who choose a destructive lifestyle to continue along that path?

The apostle Paul reminded the believers in Thessalonica that he had told them: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat" (2 Thessalonians 3:10). That’s tough love. How do we tell the difference between “will not” and “cannot” in those who are not working? How do we break down the barriers for those who cannot work for various reasons?

Proverbs doesn’t give us many clear-cut answers to these questions, but it does caution us to be on the side of the poor rather than siding with their oppressors. That and the wisdom that comes with the fear of the Lord give us a good place to start.

The Proverbs 31 Woman

2006-09-21T19:36:00.000-07:00

The lesson for Sept 24 includes four verses from Proverbs 31. Ah, the Proverbs 31 woman. I've had a rocky relationship with her through the years. She's so very competent, always on top of things. I am so very incompetent. Mother's Day is her day. Preachers everywhere cite her virtues while we mere mortals cringe at how far we fall short of the standard she sets.

At least that's the way I used to feel. However, as I've become better acquainted with this woman while reading about her every year on my way through Proverbs, I've actually become quite fond of her.

The first step along this journey came when I somehow acquired a copy of Help! I'm Being Intimidated by the Proverbs 31 Woman: My Battles with a Role Model Who's Larger Than Life by Nancy Kennedy (Multnomah Books, 1995). I'm not sure whether the content of the book or the title did me more good. It was simply nice to realize that I was not alone in my negative feelings. Finding an equally intimidated friend in the author allowed me to relax a little with this woman who burns the candle at both ends and has her household under total control.

The next step was at a Ladies' Retreat where Liz Curtis Higgs was the speaker. She pointed out that it was King Lemuel's mother who described this ideal wife. This is the kind of woman the king's mother wants for her son. Did King Lemuel find such a wife? We don't know. We only know that the poor woman he married had a mother-in-law with some fierce expectations.

What finally brought me around to actually learn to love the Proverbs 31 woman was simply reading about her without the extra baggage that comes with Mother's Day sermons. I mean, look at this lady. She is certainly not your common female Bible character. How many times have we heard about the role of women in the Bible? It was a patriarchal society. Women were on the same level as children and slaves. It was scandalous that Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman in John 4. We hear the role of Bible women described and can picture the cloaked women in modern Islamic fundamentalist societies, faces covered, scooting along in the shadows as second-class citizens.

But look at this Proverbs 31 woman! She doesn't fit the mold. While her husband is chewing the fat down at the city gate (probably involved in politics with more talk than action), she is out wheeling and dealing, buying a field, providing merchants with sashes. She's a business woman and a manager, taking full responsibility for her household. She has staff! The men down at the city gate speak highly of her. The respect they give her husband reflects their respect for her. What a lady! I think I'd like her. Sure, she accomplishes more in a day than I do in a month. I'll introduce my daughters to her so that they can see that their opportunities are not limited by their gender. Here is a woman who demonstrates that we do not have to hide in the shadows. We can use our management skills to their full potential.

The point of the lesson in referring to these verses is respect and honor. There is mutual respect between the Proverbs 31 woman and her husband. She brings him good, not harm. He praises her. Both of them are well thought of down at the city gate. They each enhance the other.

Yep, I like this lady. She's not back in the tent using manipulation in order to get her own way in a patriarchal society like Sarah and Rebekah. She's down at the wharf checking out the latest boatload of merchandise or in her home office planning next month's household schedule.

So, hurrah for the Proverbs 31 woman. You go, girl!

21st Century Nazarene Sunday School

2006-09-20T19:14:00.000-07:00

After 19 months of random ramblings on my other blog, I think I finally have a theme and a purpose for blogging -- young adult Sunday School.

I lead the young adult Sunday School class at the Odon Church of the Nazarene in Odon, Indiana. Actually, I'm not supposed to call it "Sunday School" because that's an old-fashioned program associated with children. We are officially an "adult Bible fellowship group" or just a "small group". However, since we meet on Sunday mornings at 9:30 am and generally use official Nazarene Sunday School curriculum, I'm calling it Sunday School here. Maybe if I myself were truly a young adult, I would care about the name. But as it turns out, I am more concerned about other things.

We do study the Bible and enjoy adult fellowship, by the way.

My blogging experience to date has taught me several things:

1. Search engines pick up blogs quite easily.

2. People will follow a link to a blog even when it is obviously not the most relevant hit found by a search engine.

3. A surprising number of people end up at a blog site. In just over a year, since attaching a counter to my other blog, there have been over 4,000 hits on it. That's a small number compared to blogs that actually say something, but a satisfying flow of readers as far as I'm concerned. Many have come off the search engines while looking for something else. Others followed links pointing to my blog. A few came looking specifically for me.

So anyway, it seems like maybe it's time to have a blog that says something, that has a purpose. I could rename my other blog, but I might still want to post random ramblings, so I think I'll keep it. Thus, this is a new blog with the following goals:

1. To provide informal commentary on our weekly Sunday School lessons. Currently, we're using the official WordAction adult curriculum from the Nazarene Publishing House.

2. To explore subjects related in some way to the weekly topics (either before or after the Sunday we study them together) in written form.

3. To invite others to participate by leaving comments.

4. To invite those who are interested and close enough to join us on Sunday morning.

As best as those who study such things can determine, only 20% of all blogs are still active after a year. I've beat the odds on one blog. We'll see how this one goes.