Easter is past, but it is not over. It is never inappropriate to consider Easter, its events and its ramifications. And most of these thoughts came from others, also commenting "after Easter." The Cross and it's work in our lives should always be in mind.
Let's start with Mary and the Magnificat. She began her paean of praise to the Lord for choosing her as the vehicle the Messiah would use to enter the world. Luke 1:48
"For He has had regard for the humble state of His bond slave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed."
The final comment reminds us of Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5 as He spells out nine conditions for being "blessed." And it seems, as we scroll down through the list, that they would all, eventually, apply to Mary. Not everyone can be the birth mother of Messiah, but all can share in the blessings. We do this by living with and in the light of His ministry.
We have looked at them before, and they seem to build upon each other. "Poor in spirit.. mourn... gentle... hunger and thirst for righteousness... merciful... pure in heart... peacemakers... persecuted... insulted...." And I will leave the follow up to you. Read the list of "blessings" that are delineated for this list of spiritual responses to our sin.
Jesus' words and actions on the cross have been extensively discussed so we will not repeat that here. But some new considerations occurred recently. Matthew 27:46
"My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"
We will not consider the theological discussions of this statement. Both Matthew and Mark (15:34) also give the Aramic wording.
"Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"
Notice the word for "God." Incidentally, it is a reflection of Psalm 22:1. This is, according to the experts, the generic name for God, El. Other names add a second syllable for the multiple names that we can study in reference to His character and attributes. The key item is the "oi" (in Mark and just "i" in Matthew). It is the personal possessive, "my."
Jesus was both declaring and lamenting His separation from the Father, His God. It had never before, in all of eternity, happened. And it will never happen again. The significance of that is staggering. But, as Jesus took our sins, His communion with the Father and Spirit was severed. He had been left alone.
Then, a little while later, just as He was dying, Jesus declared, (Luke 23:46)
"Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit." Having said this, He breathed His last.
Despite being "abandoned" Jesus had not forfeited His trust in His Father. That eerily resembles Job's declaration in Job 13:15.
"Though He (the Lord) slay me, yet will I trust in Him."
Job was suffering untold torture from loss of his family and fortune and now his health. Even if God were the One Who was bringing this on him (it wasn't), Job would not forsake his confidence in Him. Jesus did know that He would die, in just a few minutes. Yet, His trust was unwavering. "Into Your hands, I commend My spirit."
Thank you, Job, for putting that into human perspective for us. And now for the final part of the Luke quotation. "Having said this, He breathed His last." I always wondered at that. Now it makes sense. First, Luke, being a physician, was versed in life and death and would be attuned to this final gasp. I wondered how people there could know that Jesus was no longer breathing. They were not very close, not even those who were at the "foot of the cross." How could they hear and know?
And without life and death expertise or ever experience, how did they know that He had stopped and, "...dismissed His Spirit." (Into God's hands. Glory!)
Our understanding of crucifixion helps. Being "stretched out" on the cross was literally the description of a body undergoing this torture. As the body, hung by the spread arms, drags downward, it causes the diaphragm to expand the lungs and they inhale air. But to breathe out, the victim had to push up with his legs and feet which were nailed securely to the upright beam.
The torture this inflicted has been documented, so we will forego that. But to keep breathing, Jesus had to push up in order to exhale. The process of crucifixion was a combination of excruciating pain, physical damage to the body and organs, loss of blood (exsanguination), and the exhausting regimen of respiration.
When Jesus "breathed His last" He made one final push with His legs. That is why the soldiers broke the legs of the others who were hung with Him. Once the bones were broken, they had no leverage with which to elevate their bodies and quickly suffocated.
The point is that it was not "poetic license" that Luke used when he reported that Jesus "breathed His last." He based it on medical and physical evidence.
The final consideration comes after the "end." Matthew (27:51), Mark (15:38) and Luke (23:45) include the statement that the "veil of the temple was torn in two." Matthew and Mark specify that it was from the "top to bottom." One of the roles of the curtain in the temple was to separate the people from God and prevent them from approaching Him in an unworthy manner.
Do you recall the instances in the Old Testament when the Ark of the Covenant and access to God was violated? It cost people their lives and or health. The "separation" was not to protect God, but to protect sinners who would perish in the Presence of the Holy God. This separation for protection is reflective of the Lord setting an angel with the "flaming sword" to guard the entrance to the Garden of Eden. (Genesis 3:24)
This was also to protect man. Had Adam and Eve been able to eat of the tree of life, they would have been cursed to live forever in the sin-wracked body they inherited by rebelling against God. The tabernacle and subsequent temple was also protection by separation. But that barrier was no longer needed. Jesus had paid the penalty for our sin and to illustrate that, the dividing curtain that partitioned man and God was destroyed. The way into the "garden" of God was no longer blocked. The Holy of Holies was accessible to all who trust in Jesus.
Think on these things. Glory!
Thursday, April 27, 2017
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
Psalm 32:7 Hiding Place
Did you ever look at a verse, then come back to it a day or so later and it says something different? That happened with Psalm 32:7;
You are my hiding place; You protect me from trouble. You surround me with joyful shouts of deliverance. Selah.
When we examined it last time, the concept of "Safety" was paramount. Look again at the verse. "You" (God) "are my hiding place." That can mean a place of concealment and covering. But that is not the most in-depth understanding, it seems.
Cory ten Boom was aware of the hiding place, both as a place of concealment for her Jewish friends, and later for herself, as a place of refuge in the storm of Nazi concentration camp life. "Hiding place" can denote protection, and rightly so.
However, those who come to understand it as a place of commitment and concentration on ideas understand it more fully. I seem to recall a comic back when I was a kid that featured a place of retreat for one of the characters, maybe Charlie Brown or someone like that. He called it his "sanctum sanctorum.' He would crawl back into the cave or whatever it was to get away from the burdens of his life. Maybe it was Calvin and Hobbs.
Another use of the word is in the Latin translation of the Bible. The "sanctum sanctorum" is how the Holy of Holies was translated. That is obviously not a place that we can enter today, because the Temple has been destroyed. We will peruse that idea in a later post.
The focus is that a "hiding place" is not negative nor demeaning at all, but a very positive attitude toward life and service. Think back to Moses in Exodus 33:22. The "hiding place" was the cleft in the rock where Moses stood while God's glory passed by. God covered him with His hand. "He hideth my soul in the cleft of the rock..." came from that incident.
Moses was in intimate communion with the Lord at that time. That is the "hiding" that we need to covet. For Moses, even seeing "the back parts" of the Lord was a life changing experience. Moses returned to the people in the next chapter and his face shown so much that the people asked him to wear a veil. There is a lot of theology involved there, but the first thing to note is that Moses' countenance was a reflection of his interaction with the Lord in the "hiding place."
We can vary the lyrics of another hymn to say,"Hide me, oh Thou Great Jehovah," That is the plea of our hearts. And it is certainly as valid as praying for Him to "Guide" us. (Sorry to mess up the song. It seems appropriate.) Think about that. "Selah.
You are my hiding place; You protect me from trouble. You surround me with joyful shouts of deliverance. Selah.
When we examined it last time, the concept of "Safety" was paramount. Look again at the verse. "You" (God) "are my hiding place." That can mean a place of concealment and covering. But that is not the most in-depth understanding, it seems.
Cory ten Boom was aware of the hiding place, both as a place of concealment for her Jewish friends, and later for herself, as a place of refuge in the storm of Nazi concentration camp life. "Hiding place" can denote protection, and rightly so.
However, those who come to understand it as a place of commitment and concentration on ideas understand it more fully. I seem to recall a comic back when I was a kid that featured a place of retreat for one of the characters, maybe Charlie Brown or someone like that. He called it his "sanctum sanctorum.' He would crawl back into the cave or whatever it was to get away from the burdens of his life. Maybe it was Calvin and Hobbs.
Another use of the word is in the Latin translation of the Bible. The "sanctum sanctorum" is how the Holy of Holies was translated. That is obviously not a place that we can enter today, because the Temple has been destroyed. We will peruse that idea in a later post.
The focus is that a "hiding place" is not negative nor demeaning at all, but a very positive attitude toward life and service. Think back to Moses in Exodus 33:22. The "hiding place" was the cleft in the rock where Moses stood while God's glory passed by. God covered him with His hand. "He hideth my soul in the cleft of the rock..." came from that incident.
Moses was in intimate communion with the Lord at that time. That is the "hiding" that we need to covet. For Moses, even seeing "the back parts" of the Lord was a life changing experience. Moses returned to the people in the next chapter and his face shown so much that the people asked him to wear a veil. There is a lot of theology involved there, but the first thing to note is that Moses' countenance was a reflection of his interaction with the Lord in the "hiding place."
We can vary the lyrics of another hymn to say,"Hide me, oh Thou Great Jehovah," That is the plea of our hearts. And it is certainly as valid as praying for Him to "Guide" us. (Sorry to mess up the song. It seems appropriate.) Think about that. "Selah.
Wednesday, April 19, 2017
Stellar Geography (Part 2) See Part 1 Below
Second Question of Stellar Geography
Second question, as nuanced before (Part 1): The "edge" of the universe appears to be about 47 billion light years away in all directions. (Back ground. Light that is being emitted from a moving object is affected by the direction the object is moving. According to Einstein, the speed never changes, but the "lines" of the colors move. Objects going away from the viewer show a "red shift" as the light is shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. The amount of "shift" can be correlated with the distance that the object is from the observer. The farther away they are, the more shift is measured. As mentioned before, astronomers can estimate the distance to stars by their red shift. This is called Hubble's Law.)
That brings up our second question. Why is the red shift equal in all directions as we observe it from earth? Since the red shift can be correlated to the distance a body is away from us, wouldn't we, here on earth, expect to see a majority of "large" red shifts in the direction that is farther from the earth? If it is evenly distributed, then does that mean that the earth or at least our galaxy is at or near the center of the universe? I thought we were in an outer rim.
The uniformity of the red shift in all directions seems to indicate that the edge of the universe is equidistant from us, regardless of how we turn. If we use a merry-go-round to illustrate, sitting on one of the rearing horses will find you closer to some other "animals" than others. The only place that you are equally far all of them is when you are in the center of the ride. (We will stick to two dimensional space for now. But that does bring up another consideration. Is the universe equally dispersed in three dimensional space? If not, why not? Remember the "big bang?" It was an explosion. I will ignore that for now.)
So how can we explain the seeming centrality of the earth in the universe? Seems to be a logical conundrum.
Finally how can the planets be so heterogenous. The inner planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars are rocky. The next ones out, Jupiter and Saturn are gaseous. Finally the outer planets, Neptune, Uranus, and (maybe a planet?) Pluto are icy. (You can decide whether you want Pluto as a planet or not. And now some guys are predicting another planet out past Pluto that is ten times as large as the earth.) No evidence, of course, just a guess.
Notice the segregation of "building materials." They could not have been "thrown out" of the sun, so must have been somehow included in the "solar system package" that was somehow assembled during or just after the "hyper inflation." (See Part 1) Ironically, the sun is also gaseous, so the "layers" in the solar system are gas, rock, gas, ice. It is possible that the ice of the outer planets is frozen gas, but scientists are claiming to find water there too.
Is it just happenstance that the different layers of planets are grouped as they are? Some (naive?) commentaries explain that the heat of the sun did not melt the rocky materials so they were able to remain close to the sun while the gases were driven farther out. ...and on and on. But there is still no explanation as to how the rocky material conglomerated "close" to the sun in the first place. The asteroid belt, also seems to be rocky. Then come the gaseous planets, followed by the icy (frozen gas) planets. Pluto is included in the Kuiper belt of icy stuff, surrounded by the unseen and undetected Oort cloud.
The rocky material is largely grouped in the inner portion of the solar system, but there are some rocky moons out in the gas giants and Saturn's rings are largely dust, chunks, and some "ice." The explanation of "moon" formation is typically a collision by some outside body that split off the moon. But the gas planets could not have produced rocky moons. And Pluto and it's moon were recently reported to be quite different.
This solar system isn't nice to the "spontaneous formation" branch of solar system explanations. The more we learn, the more questions are produced. And we are not even considering the moons that orbit backwards around a couple of planets.(The term is retrograde. I love that kind of talk.)
It almost seems that a "special creation" was employed to frustrate our speculation. Just a thought.
Wednesday, April 19, 2017 Stellar Geography (Part 1) http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/04/stellar-geography-part-1.html
Second question, as nuanced before (Part 1): The "edge" of the universe appears to be about 47 billion light years away in all directions. (Back ground. Light that is being emitted from a moving object is affected by the direction the object is moving. According to Einstein, the speed never changes, but the "lines" of the colors move. Objects going away from the viewer show a "red shift" as the light is shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. The amount of "shift" can be correlated with the distance that the object is from the observer. The farther away they are, the more shift is measured. As mentioned before, astronomers can estimate the distance to stars by their red shift. This is called Hubble's Law.)
That brings up our second question. Why is the red shift equal in all directions as we observe it from earth? Since the red shift can be correlated to the distance a body is away from us, wouldn't we, here on earth, expect to see a majority of "large" red shifts in the direction that is farther from the earth? If it is evenly distributed, then does that mean that the earth or at least our galaxy is at or near the center of the universe? I thought we were in an outer rim.
The uniformity of the red shift in all directions seems to indicate that the edge of the universe is equidistant from us, regardless of how we turn. If we use a merry-go-round to illustrate, sitting on one of the rearing horses will find you closer to some other "animals" than others. The only place that you are equally far all of them is when you are in the center of the ride. (We will stick to two dimensional space for now. But that does bring up another consideration. Is the universe equally dispersed in three dimensional space? If not, why not? Remember the "big bang?" It was an explosion. I will ignore that for now.)
So how can we explain the seeming centrality of the earth in the universe? Seems to be a logical conundrum.
Finally how can the planets be so heterogenous. The inner planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars are rocky. The next ones out, Jupiter and Saturn are gaseous. Finally the outer planets, Neptune, Uranus, and (maybe a planet?) Pluto are icy. (You can decide whether you want Pluto as a planet or not. And now some guys are predicting another planet out past Pluto that is ten times as large as the earth.) No evidence, of course, just a guess.
Notice the segregation of "building materials." They could not have been "thrown out" of the sun, so must have been somehow included in the "solar system package" that was somehow assembled during or just after the "hyper inflation." (See Part 1) Ironically, the sun is also gaseous, so the "layers" in the solar system are gas, rock, gas, ice. It is possible that the ice of the outer planets is frozen gas, but scientists are claiming to find water there too.
Is it just happenstance that the different layers of planets are grouped as they are? Some (naive?) commentaries explain that the heat of the sun did not melt the rocky materials so they were able to remain close to the sun while the gases were driven farther out. ...and on and on. But there is still no explanation as to how the rocky material conglomerated "close" to the sun in the first place. The asteroid belt, also seems to be rocky. Then come the gaseous planets, followed by the icy (frozen gas) planets. Pluto is included in the Kuiper belt of icy stuff, surrounded by the unseen and undetected Oort cloud.
The rocky material is largely grouped in the inner portion of the solar system, but there are some rocky moons out in the gas giants and Saturn's rings are largely dust, chunks, and some "ice." The explanation of "moon" formation is typically a collision by some outside body that split off the moon. But the gas planets could not have produced rocky moons. And Pluto and it's moon were recently reported to be quite different.
This solar system isn't nice to the "spontaneous formation" branch of solar system explanations. The more we learn, the more questions are produced. And we are not even considering the moons that orbit backwards around a couple of planets.(The term is retrograde. I love that kind of talk.)
It almost seems that a "special creation" was employed to frustrate our speculation. Just a thought.
Wednesday, April 19, 2017 Stellar Geography (Part 1) http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/04/stellar-geography-part-1.html
Stellar Geography (Part 1)
If you don't like science, you will hate this. If you like easy answers, read no farther. There are none.
The universe has a radius of 46 to 47 billion light years. Think what that means. If the Big Bang happened 13 to 14 billion years ago and everything started at ground zero, how can we explain the size of the universe?
Here is the problem. Speck of something, super compressed goes Bang! Everything started at one point, ground zero (GZ) and began to expand or "inflate" in the first few microseconds of existence. I am not an expert, so bear with me on this, but the inflation stage seems to have three phases. First was hyperinflation, where "stuff" raced away from GZ and went way away. Then it slowed down and possibly even stopped. (Not sure here. Different "theories"–theory in a theory?--or explanations.)
I assume that at some point, possibly here, the matter began to accumulate into distinct, identifiable blobs (scientific term) or nebula that would become galaxies and then subdivide into individual stars and solar systems. These masses then began to differentiate into individual entities as discrete stars and accompanying solar systems. It is hard to imagine that happening in the hyperinflation period. (Honestly, it is hard to believe any time, but even more so here.)
Then the matter began to separate again, and according to some, it accelerated and is still accelerating. Notice that it is not just moving apart, it is accelerating. Some unknown force is pulling the universe farther and farther apart, faster and faster. Now, somewhere in that period, the stars all compacted into giant gas balls and literally fused as the fusion reaction began and they started shining. Did the accompanying planets also form simultaneously or were they a subsequent development?
Again, no idea, but let's just continue to speculate. Now we come to the problem. Recall the initial observation that the U is 46 or 47 billion light years in radius? (I assume that is measuring from earth, as if it is the center of all things. (Discussed in another article. I was going to do them together, but it is getting too long. See Stellar Geography 2.) So the farthest solar systems began to send light back to the earth after they formed. Recall that they are 47 billion light years away.
Assuming the universe is 14 billion years old, then the farthest systems would have been sending light for 14 billion years for it to be reaching us now. Here is the tricky part. Light travels one light year of distance in one year. So they would have to have been, at the most, 14 billion light years away for us to see it now. But using the "red shift" concept scientists have "measured" the distance to the farthest stars at 47 billion light years away from us.. See the problem?
If they were more than 14 billion light years away when the started "shining" we would not yet see the light after 14 billion years. So how did they get 33 billion light years farther away than we can "see?" I have read some theories that the inflation also speeded up light, so that it could go "faster." (This is quite helpful in explaining away the relativity "speed limit" Einstein established in his theory. You can figure how the "constant" of light speed affects things when it is no longer constant. I won't wait up.) But then the formation of stellar bodies and accompanying solar systems would have had to happen before or during the expansion. Ain't this gettin' complicated?
Oh, and do not forget, all of this is pure speculation. There is not one speck (excuse the pun) of evidence for any of this. It seems like games that we played as kids. We made up new rules "as needed" whenever we ran into a conflict. I liked being the rule maker. I usually won.
But back to the problem. Getting the stars "out there" and then explaining how the light from them got back here, puts us in a bind.
You know, I'm beginning to think this creation thing isn't so "far out" as it might be portrayed. (Pun intended) Forty-seven billion light years, huh? That is a long ways.
The universe has a radius of 46 to 47 billion light years. Think what that means. If the Big Bang happened 13 to 14 billion years ago and everything started at ground zero, how can we explain the size of the universe?
Here is the problem. Speck of something, super compressed goes Bang! Everything started at one point, ground zero (GZ) and began to expand or "inflate" in the first few microseconds of existence. I am not an expert, so bear with me on this, but the inflation stage seems to have three phases. First was hyperinflation, where "stuff" raced away from GZ and went way away. Then it slowed down and possibly even stopped. (Not sure here. Different "theories"–theory in a theory?--or explanations.)
I assume that at some point, possibly here, the matter began to accumulate into distinct, identifiable blobs (scientific term) or nebula that would become galaxies and then subdivide into individual stars and solar systems. These masses then began to differentiate into individual entities as discrete stars and accompanying solar systems. It is hard to imagine that happening in the hyperinflation period. (Honestly, it is hard to believe any time, but even more so here.)
Then the matter began to separate again, and according to some, it accelerated and is still accelerating. Notice that it is not just moving apart, it is accelerating. Some unknown force is pulling the universe farther and farther apart, faster and faster. Now, somewhere in that period, the stars all compacted into giant gas balls and literally fused as the fusion reaction began and they started shining. Did the accompanying planets also form simultaneously or were they a subsequent development?
Again, no idea, but let's just continue to speculate. Now we come to the problem. Recall the initial observation that the U is 46 or 47 billion light years in radius? (I assume that is measuring from earth, as if it is the center of all things. (Discussed in another article. I was going to do them together, but it is getting too long. See Stellar Geography 2.) So the farthest solar systems began to send light back to the earth after they formed. Recall that they are 47 billion light years away.
Assuming the universe is 14 billion years old, then the farthest systems would have been sending light for 14 billion years for it to be reaching us now. Here is the tricky part. Light travels one light year of distance in one year. So they would have to have been, at the most, 14 billion light years away for us to see it now. But using the "red shift" concept scientists have "measured" the distance to the farthest stars at 47 billion light years away from us.. See the problem?
If they were more than 14 billion light years away when the started "shining" we would not yet see the light after 14 billion years. So how did they get 33 billion light years farther away than we can "see?" I have read some theories that the inflation also speeded up light, so that it could go "faster." (This is quite helpful in explaining away the relativity "speed limit" Einstein established in his theory. You can figure how the "constant" of light speed affects things when it is no longer constant. I won't wait up.) But then the formation of stellar bodies and accompanying solar systems would have had to happen before or during the expansion. Ain't this gettin' complicated?
Oh, and do not forget, all of this is pure speculation. There is not one speck (excuse the pun) of evidence for any of this. It seems like games that we played as kids. We made up new rules "as needed" whenever we ran into a conflict. I liked being the rule maker. I usually won.
But back to the problem. Getting the stars "out there" and then explaining how the light from them got back here, puts us in a bind.
You know, I'm beginning to think this creation thing isn't so "far out" as it might be portrayed. (Pun intended) Forty-seven billion light years, huh? That is a long ways.
Tuesday, April 18, 2017
Psalm 32:7 Safety
Psalm 32:7 Safety
This thought completes the one on verse 6. More research on this verse revealed an allusion to Noah and the Ark. Recall the previous verse.
Therefore let everyone who is faithful pray to You at a time that You may be found When great floodwaters come, they will not reach him.
Noah preached to his generation, but for a limited time. A time came, when, the Lord could not be found. This has applied to people throughout time. Pharaoh in Egypt continued to harden his heart until the Lord stopped talking to him. Even as far back as Genesis, we find God declaring that, "His Spirit would not always strive with man." (Genesis 6:3) That is a chilling thought.
This scenario will also apply to some in relation to the Rapture. Some teachers believe that 2 Thessalonians 2:11 may indicate that people who have heard of Jesus, but rejected Him, will not believe after the Rapture.
11 For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, 12 in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.
The "time that You may be found" may be past at this point. Disclaimer: Not everyone interprets it that way, but it may be a wise thing to consider this and act before it is too late. It would not be good to be "left behind."
So Noah's second "state," on the Ark, was mirrored by David when he averred that even great floodwaters would not reach him. (Would this be another claim that the flood was worldwide? It certainly seems to indicate that there would be no other refuge that would provide safety.)
Today's continuation of that thought makes perfect sense. (Not surprised that I missed that in the previous thought. I need some help a lot of times.) (Verse 7)
You are my hiding place; You protect me from trouble. You surround me with joyful shouts of deliverance. Selah
The theme continues in three phases. First a hiding place. Whether "floods" of water or opposition or persecution arise, the ARK of the Lord provides a shelter and hiding place that keeps us secret. He hid David and Noah from any foe or threat. But that is not all. We need not cower in the dark, hoping to avoid detection.
The second level is protection both in and from trouble. Noah and David (Noavid?) both were surrounded by difficult circumstances. In 2010, Nashville received about 13-14 inches of rain in less than two days. The resulting flood waters topped every existing recorded level. Imagine that for 40 days. Noah was literally inundated with problems. (Pardon the pun.) The Lord protected him in the provision that He had instructed Noah to build. Sometimes we aid in providing our shelter and protection.
David was surrounded by enemies several times and his protection seemed to be supernatural. That same protection both physically and ideologically is afforded to "faithful" followers. And, as a result, all were surrounded by "joyful shouts of deliverance." There is the theme of joy and deliverance again.
Noah's shouts were limited to eight, including himself. David had more than that. And as members of Christ's body, the Church will be surrounded by shouts of victory and welcome when we are ushered into heaven, either by death or by the Rapture. Hallelujah!
And finally, David advises us to "Selah," think on these things. It is a serious, yet a joyful perspective. And the "deliverance" can certainly apply to being removed from the danger. Noah floated over it. David persevered through it, and some will be removed before it falls.
Hallelujah!
This thought completes the one on verse 6. More research on this verse revealed an allusion to Noah and the Ark. Recall the previous verse.
Therefore let everyone who is faithful pray to You at a time that You may be found When great floodwaters come, they will not reach him.
Noah preached to his generation, but for a limited time. A time came, when, the Lord could not be found. This has applied to people throughout time. Pharaoh in Egypt continued to harden his heart until the Lord stopped talking to him. Even as far back as Genesis, we find God declaring that, "His Spirit would not always strive with man." (Genesis 6:3) That is a chilling thought.
This scenario will also apply to some in relation to the Rapture. Some teachers believe that 2 Thessalonians 2:11 may indicate that people who have heard of Jesus, but rejected Him, will not believe after the Rapture.
11 For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, 12 in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.
The "time that You may be found" may be past at this point. Disclaimer: Not everyone interprets it that way, but it may be a wise thing to consider this and act before it is too late. It would not be good to be "left behind."
So Noah's second "state," on the Ark, was mirrored by David when he averred that even great floodwaters would not reach him. (Would this be another claim that the flood was worldwide? It certainly seems to indicate that there would be no other refuge that would provide safety.)
Today's continuation of that thought makes perfect sense. (Not surprised that I missed that in the previous thought. I need some help a lot of times.) (Verse 7)
You are my hiding place; You protect me from trouble. You surround me with joyful shouts of deliverance. Selah
The theme continues in three phases. First a hiding place. Whether "floods" of water or opposition or persecution arise, the ARK of the Lord provides a shelter and hiding place that keeps us secret. He hid David and Noah from any foe or threat. But that is not all. We need not cower in the dark, hoping to avoid detection.
The second level is protection both in and from trouble. Noah and David (Noavid?) both were surrounded by difficult circumstances. In 2010, Nashville received about 13-14 inches of rain in less than two days. The resulting flood waters topped every existing recorded level. Imagine that for 40 days. Noah was literally inundated with problems. (Pardon the pun.) The Lord protected him in the provision that He had instructed Noah to build. Sometimes we aid in providing our shelter and protection.
David was surrounded by enemies several times and his protection seemed to be supernatural. That same protection both physically and ideologically is afforded to "faithful" followers. And, as a result, all were surrounded by "joyful shouts of deliverance." There is the theme of joy and deliverance again.
Noah's shouts were limited to eight, including himself. David had more than that. And as members of Christ's body, the Church will be surrounded by shouts of victory and welcome when we are ushered into heaven, either by death or by the Rapture. Hallelujah!
And finally, David advises us to "Selah," think on these things. It is a serious, yet a joyful perspective. And the "deliverance" can certainly apply to being removed from the danger. Noah floated over it. David persevered through it, and some will be removed before it falls.
Hallelujah!
Monday, April 17, 2017
Acts 19 Barney Fife in the Bible?
It is possible to find reruns of the Barney Fife show, also known as the Andy Griffith Show on TV. Every now and then a crowd would assemble somewhere in Mayberry and it was Barney's job to disperse them.
"Y'all go home now! Ya hear? Go on, git!"Didn't you just love to see the "take charge guy" tear into those pesky assemblers? Listen to the account in Acts 19 as the city clerk talks to the crowd which had gathered to deal with "this Paul." (Verse 26) They were at a severe disadvantage because the preceding verses had recounted the miracles that Paul had performed. He was preaching and persuading many to turn to the True and Living God.
So they, logically, rioted to draw attention away from the failures of their god. Several hours later, the town clerk (verse 35) began to reason with the crowd and calmed them down. Verses 40 and 41give us the finale of the brouhaha. He is speaking...
40 "For indeed we are in danger of being accused of a riot in connection with today's events, since there is no real cause for it, and in this connection we will be unable to account for this disorderly gathering." 41 After saying this he dismissed the assembly.
"There is no real cause for it...." The riot that is. Sounds like he is somewhat sympathetic toward Paul and his message. Anyway, "...we will be unable to" (logically) "account for this disorderly gathering."
Verse 41 gives Barney his big day. "After saying this he dismissed the assembly." Sometimes we just need an authority figure to step in and deal with an unruly crowd.
Maybe we need this clerk or Barney to show up at some of our "disorderly" political gatherings.
"Y'all go home now! Ya hear? Go on, git!"Didn't you just love to see the "take charge guy" tear into those pesky assemblers? Listen to the account in Acts 19 as the city clerk talks to the crowd which had gathered to deal with "this Paul." (Verse 26) They were at a severe disadvantage because the preceding verses had recounted the miracles that Paul had performed. He was preaching and persuading many to turn to the True and Living God.
So they, logically, rioted to draw attention away from the failures of their god. Several hours later, the town clerk (verse 35) began to reason with the crowd and calmed them down. Verses 40 and 41give us the finale of the brouhaha. He is speaking...
40 "For indeed we are in danger of being accused of a riot in connection with today's events, since there is no real cause for it, and in this connection we will be unable to account for this disorderly gathering." 41 After saying this he dismissed the assembly.
"There is no real cause for it...." The riot that is. Sounds like he is somewhat sympathetic toward Paul and his message. Anyway, "...we will be unable to" (logically) "account for this disorderly gathering."
Verse 41 gives Barney his big day. "After saying this he dismissed the assembly." Sometimes we just need an authority figure to step in and deal with an unruly crowd.
Maybe we need this clerk or Barney to show up at some of our "disorderly" political gatherings.
Sunday, April 16, 2017
Floods
Psalm 32:6
Therefore let everyone who is faithful pray to You at a time that You may be found. When great floodwaters come they will not reach him.
"Therefore" points us back to the previous verses and thoughts. Our previous meditations focused on the fact that David is now free from guilt related to his great sin. Need a review? (Psalm 32:1-5)
David presses on in the rest of the chapter as he both revels in his new freedom and the ramifications of his new condition. In our verse for today he is focused on prayer. As a a result of our previous "struggles," let me (David) encourage everyone who is propelled by faith to keep a prayer routine. Pray when the Lord is available.
This might seem a little odd to say, since the Lord is available all the time to hear us. But it seems that David may have a different idea in mind. When we are "away" from the Lord, either through deliberate rebellion or inadvertent neglect, we are not so inclined to pray. So His "inaccessibility" is driven by our state of fellowship of lack thereof. For instance, Peter says our prayers are hindered when we are not living in right relation to our wives. (1 Peter 3:7)
The interpretation of that will be left to the individual to sort out. Regardless of how it happens, the result is a failure to "find" God in our prayers. On the contrary, when we are in touch with Him, even great "floodwaters" will not reach us.
Looking back again at David's context, these floodwaters are very likely those of guilt. There is a condition known as "survivors' guilt" where an innocent person feels guilty at having escaped some terrible event in which others were injured or died. If "innocent" people are overwhelmed by guilt, surely the guilty also face such overwhelming emotional tides. (Of course, I would not know personally, since I am so close to perfect. ED note: Nope.)
Satan likes nothing better than to paralyze God's people with fake and false guilt. "How can you work for or even speak about God after what you did? Just keep your lip buttoned."
David stole another man's wife. He committed adultery. He conspired to cover it up, going so far as to attempt to entice the wronged man to believe that the newly conceived child was his own. Then David conspired to murder the husband. And he carried out the homicide. Then he further covered it up.
Do not believe for a second that Satan was willing to let him forget it. Before he repented, the Holy Spirit was after him day and night. That pretty much translates to 24/7. Once David was forgiven, Satan began to torment him with the horror of what he had done. Just as there is a remedy for real guilt, remorse and repentance, there is a remedy for false guilt. David unveils it. "Pray." Paul said to "Pray without ceasing." (1 Thessalonians 5:17) Holman says, "Pray constantly."
I am told that in Greek, this is the shortest verse in the Bible. It doesn't need much explanation. (So I won't.) David's only addition was to do it before the flood comes. We might use the little Dutch boy approach to floods, but if we have to build the dike before we can stick our finger into the hole, "we in trouble."
"Therefore," since we have had the real guilt removed by the Lord, all we need to do is keep in touch–in the good times. And when the "bad" times come, "great floodwaters," the dike will hold.
The floods will not reach us. Guilt is defeated by the barrier of forgiveness and faith.
"...let everyone who is faithful pray....
Therefore let everyone who is faithful pray to You at a time that You may be found. When great floodwaters come they will not reach him.
"Therefore" points us back to the previous verses and thoughts. Our previous meditations focused on the fact that David is now free from guilt related to his great sin. Need a review? (Psalm 32:1-5)
David presses on in the rest of the chapter as he both revels in his new freedom and the ramifications of his new condition. In our verse for today he is focused on prayer. As a a result of our previous "struggles," let me (David) encourage everyone who is propelled by faith to keep a prayer routine. Pray when the Lord is available.
This might seem a little odd to say, since the Lord is available all the time to hear us. But it seems that David may have a different idea in mind. When we are "away" from the Lord, either through deliberate rebellion or inadvertent neglect, we are not so inclined to pray. So His "inaccessibility" is driven by our state of fellowship of lack thereof. For instance, Peter says our prayers are hindered when we are not living in right relation to our wives. (1 Peter 3:7)
The interpretation of that will be left to the individual to sort out. Regardless of how it happens, the result is a failure to "find" God in our prayers. On the contrary, when we are in touch with Him, even great "floodwaters" will not reach us.
Looking back again at David's context, these floodwaters are very likely those of guilt. There is a condition known as "survivors' guilt" where an innocent person feels guilty at having escaped some terrible event in which others were injured or died. If "innocent" people are overwhelmed by guilt, surely the guilty also face such overwhelming emotional tides. (Of course, I would not know personally, since I am so close to perfect. ED note: Nope.)
Satan likes nothing better than to paralyze God's people with fake and false guilt. "How can you work for or even speak about God after what you did? Just keep your lip buttoned."
David stole another man's wife. He committed adultery. He conspired to cover it up, going so far as to attempt to entice the wronged man to believe that the newly conceived child was his own. Then David conspired to murder the husband. And he carried out the homicide. Then he further covered it up.
Do not believe for a second that Satan was willing to let him forget it. Before he repented, the Holy Spirit was after him day and night. That pretty much translates to 24/7. Once David was forgiven, Satan began to torment him with the horror of what he had done. Just as there is a remedy for real guilt, remorse and repentance, there is a remedy for false guilt. David unveils it. "Pray." Paul said to "Pray without ceasing." (1 Thessalonians 5:17) Holman says, "Pray constantly."
I am told that in Greek, this is the shortest verse in the Bible. It doesn't need much explanation. (So I won't.) David's only addition was to do it before the flood comes. We might use the little Dutch boy approach to floods, but if we have to build the dike before we can stick our finger into the hole, "we in trouble."
"Therefore," since we have had the real guilt removed by the Lord, all we need to do is keep in touch–in the good times. And when the "bad" times come, "great floodwaters," the dike will hold.
The floods will not reach us. Guilt is defeated by the barrier of forgiveness and faith.
"...let everyone who is faithful pray....
Saturday, April 15, 2017
Somber Saturday
Friday gets a lot of attention and it should. And of course Sunday is Resurrection Day and the whole world stops and gazes, either in amazement, wonder, or even consternation. But what about Saturday? Maybe that was the day that the Jews approached Pilate to secure the tomb. They might not have had enough time on Friday, as it became the Sabbath immediately after Jesus died. If they waited until sundown on Saturday, they could approach the Governor without violating the Sabbath.
Regardless of what they did, it might give us a chance to reflect a little. As I perused the narrative again, I was struck with the catcalls and even cursing that came from the crowd. A (not too good, in my opinion) movie several years ago billed itself as chronicling the "Last Temptation of Christ."
It purported to offer a glimpse into Jesus' mind as He hung on the cross. Supposedly He was tempted to come off of the cross, marry Mary Magdalene, and live happily ever after, until they both died. I did not ever, nor will I ever see it, but I do have a little commentary. For those who argue that you cannot evaluate something without experiencing it, I would posit one argument. I grew up on a farm. I have never partaken of any animal manure. But I can confidently affirm that it is not good. Don't eat it! Nuff said.
The metaphor was deliberately chosen. The movie went into places, probably worse than the gutter in the farm yard. And the proposition is so ludicrous, both logically and theologically, that it is hard to measure its level of preposterousness. First, the belief that Jesus, being supernatural, could have come off the cross had He wished to do so, is the only accurate component of the argument.
That He would do so to marry a mortal strains credibility. What would He do as she grew older? Would He continually "renew" her life span so that she would not die? Recall, she was a sinner, so an "eternal" life in her body would be exactly the disaster that God prevented when He blocked the entrance to the Garden of Eden. (Genesis 3:22, 23) To be trapped in this sinful body forever would be a form of hell itself.
No, Jesus would not come off the cross to marry a woman. But He could have come off the cross. He could have called 10,000 angels. (Matthew 26:51-53) I believe that this is where the real "last temptation" was embodied. Recall the crowd was taunting Him...(Luke 23:37-39)
"and saying, "If You are the King of the Jews, save Yourself!" 38 Now there was also an inscription above Him, "THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS."
Matthew 27:42 also records that some called for Him to come down, and they "would believe on Him." That was Satan, attempting to complete the temptation of Matthew 4:9 where he promised Jesus that He could be ruler of the world if only He would worship Satan. The temptation was not to be "King" but to short circuit the excruciating* process of the cross. Satan was saying, in effect, "There is no need for you to go through all this messy stuff. I can bring the Kingdom (Millennium) to You now. No muss, no fuss, no nasty dying."
Here, the voice of the Tempter rings out again. "We'll worship and believe if You prove that You are supernatural." Recall, as I am sure Jesus did, that this crowd has eaten food He provided out of essentially nothing. They have seen sick healed, lame restored, blind made to see, deaf and dumb restored, demons exorcized, and finally, the dead raised to life. They may have heard stories of walking on water, changing water into wine, and other "private miracles" and their response, as of "last night" before Pilate was "crucify Him!"
No, from a practical standpoint, Jesus knew that if they "believed" it would be for a short time only. History all the way back to Genesis confirms that. They did not need to see one more miracle. They needed a transformation that only the shed blood of The Lamb of God could effect.
The thief tuned into this cry and added his own: Luke 23
39 One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying, "Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!"
Either this thief was offering to join in the "belief" or something else. Personally, I would favor the latter. He presumed that since they were both condemned criminals, they were essentially soul mates. If Christ got free, He would take his co-criminals with Him. We have all seen enough shoot'em up criminal shows to know that the comradery among thieves and their ilk is non-existent. If someone escapes from prison and takes other prisoners, it is to use them as decoys to increase the likelihood of escape for the prime mover.
Just as a passing thought, Mr. Thief may have intended to split with Jesus ASAP, figuring that the authorities would concentrate on recapturing Jesus and thus increasing his odds of escape. His level of presumptuous anticipation is countered by the response of the other criminal. He recognized that he was receiving his due penalty and did not attempt to circumvent justice.
"Remember me...." What a cry of repentance and acceptance. Just as Peter once cried out, "Lord save me!" so this dying man repeated the cry. (Matthew 14) Is there a cry that the Lord prizes more than that?
The ability to save us is grounded in the fact that He stayed on the cross. He died for me. He rose to prove that His death was enough to pay for my sins. (Romans 4:25) He went to prepare a place for me. And He is coming again for me. (John 14) If only the thief had understood.
And our job is to tell this story to others. "He is risen. He is risen indeed."
This might help to tell. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew9-FJjEzpU
(Skip the ad.)
*The extreme pain and agony of crucifixion was beyond any vocabulary, so the Romans invented a new word. "Out of the cross." Excruciating is the word invented to describe the torture.
Regardless of what they did, it might give us a chance to reflect a little. As I perused the narrative again, I was struck with the catcalls and even cursing that came from the crowd. A (not too good, in my opinion) movie several years ago billed itself as chronicling the "Last Temptation of Christ."
It purported to offer a glimpse into Jesus' mind as He hung on the cross. Supposedly He was tempted to come off of the cross, marry Mary Magdalene, and live happily ever after, until they both died. I did not ever, nor will I ever see it, but I do have a little commentary. For those who argue that you cannot evaluate something without experiencing it, I would posit one argument. I grew up on a farm. I have never partaken of any animal manure. But I can confidently affirm that it is not good. Don't eat it! Nuff said.
The metaphor was deliberately chosen. The movie went into places, probably worse than the gutter in the farm yard. And the proposition is so ludicrous, both logically and theologically, that it is hard to measure its level of preposterousness. First, the belief that Jesus, being supernatural, could have come off the cross had He wished to do so, is the only accurate component of the argument.
That He would do so to marry a mortal strains credibility. What would He do as she grew older? Would He continually "renew" her life span so that she would not die? Recall, she was a sinner, so an "eternal" life in her body would be exactly the disaster that God prevented when He blocked the entrance to the Garden of Eden. (Genesis 3:22, 23) To be trapped in this sinful body forever would be a form of hell itself.
No, Jesus would not come off the cross to marry a woman. But He could have come off the cross. He could have called 10,000 angels. (Matthew 26:51-53) I believe that this is where the real "last temptation" was embodied. Recall the crowd was taunting Him...(Luke 23:37-39)
"and saying, "If You are the King of the Jews, save Yourself!" 38 Now there was also an inscription above Him, "THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS."
Matthew 27:42 also records that some called for Him to come down, and they "would believe on Him." That was Satan, attempting to complete the temptation of Matthew 4:9 where he promised Jesus that He could be ruler of the world if only He would worship Satan. The temptation was not to be "King" but to short circuit the excruciating* process of the cross. Satan was saying, in effect, "There is no need for you to go through all this messy stuff. I can bring the Kingdom (Millennium) to You now. No muss, no fuss, no nasty dying."
Here, the voice of the Tempter rings out again. "We'll worship and believe if You prove that You are supernatural." Recall, as I am sure Jesus did, that this crowd has eaten food He provided out of essentially nothing. They have seen sick healed, lame restored, blind made to see, deaf and dumb restored, demons exorcized, and finally, the dead raised to life. They may have heard stories of walking on water, changing water into wine, and other "private miracles" and their response, as of "last night" before Pilate was "crucify Him!"
No, from a practical standpoint, Jesus knew that if they "believed" it would be for a short time only. History all the way back to Genesis confirms that. They did not need to see one more miracle. They needed a transformation that only the shed blood of The Lamb of God could effect.
The thief tuned into this cry and added his own: Luke 23
39 One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying, "Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!"
Either this thief was offering to join in the "belief" or something else. Personally, I would favor the latter. He presumed that since they were both condemned criminals, they were essentially soul mates. If Christ got free, He would take his co-criminals with Him. We have all seen enough shoot'em up criminal shows to know that the comradery among thieves and their ilk is non-existent. If someone escapes from prison and takes other prisoners, it is to use them as decoys to increase the likelihood of escape for the prime mover.
Just as a passing thought, Mr. Thief may have intended to split with Jesus ASAP, figuring that the authorities would concentrate on recapturing Jesus and thus increasing his odds of escape. His level of presumptuous anticipation is countered by the response of the other criminal. He recognized that he was receiving his due penalty and did not attempt to circumvent justice.
"Remember me...." What a cry of repentance and acceptance. Just as Peter once cried out, "Lord save me!" so this dying man repeated the cry. (Matthew 14) Is there a cry that the Lord prizes more than that?
The ability to save us is grounded in the fact that He stayed on the cross. He died for me. He rose to prove that His death was enough to pay for my sins. (Romans 4:25) He went to prepare a place for me. And He is coming again for me. (John 14) If only the thief had understood.
And our job is to tell this story to others. "He is risen. He is risen indeed."
This might help to tell. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew9-FJjEzpU
(Skip the ad.)
*The extreme pain and agony of crucifixion was beyond any vocabulary, so the Romans invented a new word. "Out of the cross." Excruciating is the word invented to describe the torture.
Monday, April 10, 2017
Psalm 32 Freedom
Many of us recall the haunting, almost plaintive cry of "Freedooooom," in a Mel Gibson movie. (Some may call it triumphant. Whatever.) That has been "borrowed" by several firms, including a debt reduction ministry, but the meaning is replete with nuances. It might be a demand to be met, a plea to be satisfied, or an exclamation of receipt. "I have it." We will explore this later.
David leads us into this thought: Psalm 32:5
I acknowledged my sin to You, And my iniquity I did not hide; I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord"; And You forgave the guilt of my sin. Selah.
David has been working his way to this conclusion. Psalm 51 seems to be a precursor to this in that it is the plea for forgiveness and cleansing. (We examined that in the studies posted earlier.*) Psalm 32, and especially verse 5 is the culmination of his plea. Verse 11 of chapter 32 summarizes it for us: "...shout for joy, all you who are upright in heart." Good stuff.
We examined the three aspects of David's description of his acts in the previous studies. He called his actions sin, transgression, and iniquity. As we discussed before, sin is "missing the mark." Transgression is going beyond the boundaries or trespass. It can be inadvertent or deliberate. When we cross over into the "deliberate trespass," territory, we are finding iniquity. We, like David, know it is wrong and purpose to do it anyway.
Verses 1 and 2 enumerate David's deliverance. "...transgression is forgiven, sin is covered, the Lord does not impute iniquity" The three aspects of David's deliverance occurred at the same time. His trespass was forgiven, his sin was covered, he was not charged with the offense.
His descriptions reveal his evaluation of his condition. He was deeply flawed, not slightly marred and in need of minor correction. Like a friend of mine used to say about a doctor's advice for treating cancer: "You cut that out!" So David dared not minimize his situation. Nor dare we. It was malignant and serious.
And to address the elephant in the room, there is an implicit warning against everyone who thinks about sin and imagines that he "can get away with it." David reminds us of two witnesses who know every move we make. The first one is David. He knew what he was doing and what he had done. And you know yourself. The second Witness is the one Who keeps David from escaping. The ever present YOU in both chapters. David recognized the true target of his sin and rebellion. And God knows. And now the solution.
A radical operation was required. First, David acknowledged his sin. This is the best interpretation of "name it and claim it." This was sin. I did it. The confession also involved open declaration. There was no more hiding or covering it. David had sinned in the sight of the entire nation. His acceptance of responsibility likewise required a public revelation. He did not hide it any longer. Look back at his comments. "...kept silent, deceit, hidden."
And finally, confession to the Lord. Lee Strobel, in "The Case for Christ," outlines what it means to have faith in Jesus. First, you must believe the facts. But just believing everything about Jesus is not enough. (The demons "believe and tremble." But they are not saved. James 2:19) John 1:12 tells us that everyone who believes and receives Him will become children of God.
We recognize our sin. "I am a sinner, Lord." We repent. "I am sorry I rebelled and rejected you." Note, not just sorry we got caught. Sorry that we did it. And finally we receive the forgiveness offered. "Thank You for dying for me, Jesus. I accept you as my Savior."
The shout in verse 11 mirrors verse 1: "How blessed." David and all the rest of us who have been forgiven raise our voices. "Freeeedddoooommmm!" Selah: Think of that.
Join us.
*(Earlier posts may be found at: https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=509194200217608031#allposts)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2:19&version=NASB
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1%3A12&version=NASB
David leads us into this thought: Psalm 32:5
I acknowledged my sin to You, And my iniquity I did not hide; I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord"; And You forgave the guilt of my sin. Selah.
David has been working his way to this conclusion. Psalm 51 seems to be a precursor to this in that it is the plea for forgiveness and cleansing. (We examined that in the studies posted earlier.*) Psalm 32, and especially verse 5 is the culmination of his plea. Verse 11 of chapter 32 summarizes it for us: "...shout for joy, all you who are upright in heart." Good stuff.
We examined the three aspects of David's description of his acts in the previous studies. He called his actions sin, transgression, and iniquity. As we discussed before, sin is "missing the mark." Transgression is going beyond the boundaries or trespass. It can be inadvertent or deliberate. When we cross over into the "deliberate trespass," territory, we are finding iniquity. We, like David, know it is wrong and purpose to do it anyway.
Verses 1 and 2 enumerate David's deliverance. "...transgression is forgiven, sin is covered, the Lord does not impute iniquity" The three aspects of David's deliverance occurred at the same time. His trespass was forgiven, his sin was covered, he was not charged with the offense.
His descriptions reveal his evaluation of his condition. He was deeply flawed, not slightly marred and in need of minor correction. Like a friend of mine used to say about a doctor's advice for treating cancer: "You cut that out!" So David dared not minimize his situation. Nor dare we. It was malignant and serious.
And to address the elephant in the room, there is an implicit warning against everyone who thinks about sin and imagines that he "can get away with it." David reminds us of two witnesses who know every move we make. The first one is David. He knew what he was doing and what he had done. And you know yourself. The second Witness is the one Who keeps David from escaping. The ever present YOU in both chapters. David recognized the true target of his sin and rebellion. And God knows. And now the solution.
A radical operation was required. First, David acknowledged his sin. This is the best interpretation of "name it and claim it." This was sin. I did it. The confession also involved open declaration. There was no more hiding or covering it. David had sinned in the sight of the entire nation. His acceptance of responsibility likewise required a public revelation. He did not hide it any longer. Look back at his comments. "...kept silent, deceit, hidden."
And finally, confession to the Lord. Lee Strobel, in "The Case for Christ," outlines what it means to have faith in Jesus. First, you must believe the facts. But just believing everything about Jesus is not enough. (The demons "believe and tremble." But they are not saved. James 2:19) John 1:12 tells us that everyone who believes and receives Him will become children of God.
We recognize our sin. "I am a sinner, Lord." We repent. "I am sorry I rebelled and rejected you." Note, not just sorry we got caught. Sorry that we did it. And finally we receive the forgiveness offered. "Thank You for dying for me, Jesus. I accept you as my Savior."
The shout in verse 11 mirrors verse 1: "How blessed." David and all the rest of us who have been forgiven raise our voices. "Freeeedddoooommmm!" Selah: Think of that.
Join us.
*(Earlier posts may be found at: https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=509194200217608031#allposts)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2:19&version=NASB
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1%3A12&version=NASB
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
Psalm 32:3, 4 Groaning
Last time we shared in great joy with David in as he and we realized forgiveness, having sin covered, and not having our sins imputed to our account. In other words, we were justified, sanctified, and waiting to be glorified. All of these things happened simultaneously, but, like a complicated event or play, it is often instructive to break the components down into individual actions to understand. That was the thrust of the previous post. And now we go forward from that point.
David continued to share his pathway to Joy. (Verse 3)
When I kept silent about my sin, my body wasted away through my groaning all day long.
We get a little glimpse into the end of verse 2. "... in whose spirit there is no deceit!" We can reasonably infer that David resorted to all kinds of subterfuge and deceit to keep his secret. Guilt has been blamed for a significant portion of physical infirmities and the lion's share of mental problems.
Many psychologists counsel their patients to "forgive themselves." The guilt resulting from past offenses, whether against God or other people, remains in the subconscious and often conscious thought. There is no escape, even when we "forgive ourselves" because the reality of pain and suffering in others cannot be ignored.
In verse 3 David implied that he was "silent," either by not telling anything or worse, actually misleading and lying about his "sin." He recounts his physical reaction. "My body wasted away." Holman says, "my bones became brittle." I do not think that he was referring to osteoporosis. The condition was evidently painful and progressed rapidly. Contrary to his previous practice of concealing his actions, he was now open and vocal about his suffering.
Verse 4 delineates the cause.
For day and night Your hand was heavy on me; my strength was drained as in the summer's heat. Selah
Unlike the psychologists, David recognized the cause of his distress. Spoiler: The next verse repeats the solution. If you can't wait, look ahead.) "...day and night..." expands on his groaning "all day long." It is no wonder that his body was wasting away. He was in agony both night and day.
Have you ever been dehydrated? The loss of excess amounts of fluid has extreme effects. And the more we lose, the worse it becomes. It progresses from mild, a five to eight percent decrease leading to fatigue and dizziness. When the deficit is over ten percent of total body water, physical and mental deterioration occurs, accompanied by severe thirst. The most severe effect of death occurs at a loss of between fifteen and twenty-five percent of the body water. David's condition was not minor, temporary, or merely inconvenient.
His final comment is that he was rapidly losing strength. For a vigorous, active guy like David, that diminution of vitality was a serious attack. Just an aside, the Lord often attacks us (as sinners) at our strong point. He is not doing it to torment us, but to bring us to the point of repentance. Hebrews 12:6
...for the Lord disciplines the one He loves and punishes every son He receives.
Recall the source of the interactions. The Lord is not willing to allow us to continue in rebellion and sin. He shows us physically how our spiritual being is suffering. Our ability to serve Him and minister to others is impeded, and in fact eliminated, by indwelling and secret sin.
It is almost humorous to see how the Lord used guys like Chuck Colson BECAUSE of the suffering they endured for their actions. Chuck was not saved when he conducted himself unbecomingly, but he "paid the price" for his sins. The doors that were opened to him were a direct result of the discipline. Almost counter intuitively, the suffering led to success.
It just goes to prove, again, that the Lord uses our "weaknesses" to demonstrate His strength.
...when I am weak, then I am strong. (2 Corinthians 12:10)
And just before I posted this, I was reading in Proverbs 17:22. It sounds like David was "pre-reading" what Solomon would write. Or maybe, Solomon learned some of his wisdom from his daddy. That is not a bad thing.
A joyful heart is good medicine, But a broken spirit dries up the bones.
David is living and walking proof. Once his heart was right and joyful, he was refreshed, rejuvenated, or just plain re-hydrated. God's care is complete.
David's final epitaph was " a man after God's own heart." (Acts 13:22) (A little aside. That phrase is only found one time, almost in passing, in 1 Samuel 13:14. Paul had done a "little" studying in order to find that and apply it to David, the progenitor of Jesus. How many times have you read the Old Testament. Did you see that? I wonder how many times Paul read 1 Chronicles.)
David's sin led to discipline which led to victory. This is not to encourage sinning. Actually none of us need any prodding there. But it does encourage us to be repentant and allow the Lord to use these errors to bring others to Him.
Look back at verse 3. It ends in "Selah." One explanation for that is a pause. I heard once that it could mean, "Think of that." We tried to do a little of that today. It is hard to "fess up." But David showed us it is harder to clam up.
David continued to share his pathway to Joy. (Verse 3)
When I kept silent about my sin, my body wasted away through my groaning all day long.
We get a little glimpse into the end of verse 2. "... in whose spirit there is no deceit!" We can reasonably infer that David resorted to all kinds of subterfuge and deceit to keep his secret. Guilt has been blamed for a significant portion of physical infirmities and the lion's share of mental problems.
Many psychologists counsel their patients to "forgive themselves." The guilt resulting from past offenses, whether against God or other people, remains in the subconscious and often conscious thought. There is no escape, even when we "forgive ourselves" because the reality of pain and suffering in others cannot be ignored.
In verse 3 David implied that he was "silent," either by not telling anything or worse, actually misleading and lying about his "sin." He recounts his physical reaction. "My body wasted away." Holman says, "my bones became brittle." I do not think that he was referring to osteoporosis. The condition was evidently painful and progressed rapidly. Contrary to his previous practice of concealing his actions, he was now open and vocal about his suffering.
Verse 4 delineates the cause.
For day and night Your hand was heavy on me; my strength was drained as in the summer's heat. Selah
Unlike the psychologists, David recognized the cause of his distress. Spoiler: The next verse repeats the solution. If you can't wait, look ahead.) "...day and night..." expands on his groaning "all day long." It is no wonder that his body was wasting away. He was in agony both night and day.
Have you ever been dehydrated? The loss of excess amounts of fluid has extreme effects. And the more we lose, the worse it becomes. It progresses from mild, a five to eight percent decrease leading to fatigue and dizziness. When the deficit is over ten percent of total body water, physical and mental deterioration occurs, accompanied by severe thirst. The most severe effect of death occurs at a loss of between fifteen and twenty-five percent of the body water. David's condition was not minor, temporary, or merely inconvenient.
His final comment is that he was rapidly losing strength. For a vigorous, active guy like David, that diminution of vitality was a serious attack. Just an aside, the Lord often attacks us (as sinners) at our strong point. He is not doing it to torment us, but to bring us to the point of repentance. Hebrews 12:6
...for the Lord disciplines the one He loves and punishes every son He receives.
Recall the source of the interactions. The Lord is not willing to allow us to continue in rebellion and sin. He shows us physically how our spiritual being is suffering. Our ability to serve Him and minister to others is impeded, and in fact eliminated, by indwelling and secret sin.
It is almost humorous to see how the Lord used guys like Chuck Colson BECAUSE of the suffering they endured for their actions. Chuck was not saved when he conducted himself unbecomingly, but he "paid the price" for his sins. The doors that were opened to him were a direct result of the discipline. Almost counter intuitively, the suffering led to success.
It just goes to prove, again, that the Lord uses our "weaknesses" to demonstrate His strength.
...when I am weak, then I am strong. (2 Corinthians 12:10)
And just before I posted this, I was reading in Proverbs 17:22. It sounds like David was "pre-reading" what Solomon would write. Or maybe, Solomon learned some of his wisdom from his daddy. That is not a bad thing.
A joyful heart is good medicine, But a broken spirit dries up the bones.
David is living and walking proof. Once his heart was right and joyful, he was refreshed, rejuvenated, or just plain re-hydrated. God's care is complete.
David's final epitaph was " a man after God's own heart." (Acts 13:22) (A little aside. That phrase is only found one time, almost in passing, in 1 Samuel 13:14. Paul had done a "little" studying in order to find that and apply it to David, the progenitor of Jesus. How many times have you read the Old Testament. Did you see that? I wonder how many times Paul read 1 Chronicles.)
David's sin led to discipline which led to victory. This is not to encourage sinning. Actually none of us need any prodding there. But it does encourage us to be repentant and allow the Lord to use these errors to bring others to Him.
Look back at verse 3. It ends in "Selah." One explanation for that is a pause. I heard once that it could mean, "Think of that." We tried to do a little of that today. It is hard to "fess up." But David showed us it is harder to clam up.
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
Psalm 32 Joyful and Blessed
Psalm 32:1 found David in a joyful mood. And it is no wonder. His transgression was forgiven and his sin was covered. Consider the difference between "forgiven" and "covered." Before that, look at the words David used: sin, transgression, and iniquity.
Sin is "missing the mark." We have all "missed the mark." (Romans 3:23) Because we have missed the mark, we trespass or cross a boundary. A deliberate crossing would escalate to transgression. It is a presumptuous, deliberate crossing of the line. And iniquity is more deeply rooted. Iniquity means "premeditated choice, continuing without repentance." Yep, David had all of those, as do a few others, me most of all.
All of these are fatal conditions. Romans 6:23 pronounces the death sentence. "Wages of sin is death." "Sin" might be considered the least offensive of the three and if it is worthy of death, then the rest are far more so. If we stop here, the future is bleak and hopeless.
Recall David. He was forgiven, his sin was covered. The rest of the verse, "The gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord." How can we be forgiven of sins, transgressions, and iniquity? We accept the "covering" of Jesus' blood.
During the Tabernacle and Temple worship, the high priest would take the blood of the sacrifice, the Atonement sacrifice, and sprinkle it on the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant, which was within the Holy of Holies. Jesus was our Passover, but Hebrews reassures us that He only needed to die once, so the Passover also covered the Atonement. Hebrews 10 explains:
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God,
The priests offered sacrifices, especially during the feast days, to picture this act that would forgive and cover all of our sins. Since Jesus only had to die once, the Passover offering (April) also counted for the Atonement offering (September/October) which came five or six months later. Jesus made one offering for all sins, for all time.
So in the Atonement ceremony, the High Priest took some of the blood from the sacrifice into the Holy of Holies. The Shekina Glory, representing God's presence hovered between the two cherubim above the top of the Ark itself. This covering was called the "mercy seat" and the law was contained within the body of the Ark. So the blood, sprinkled on the mercy seat literally came between the representation of the Lord and the law which we have broken. The "sin" was covered by the blood.
Jesus' sacrifice was the basis for forgiveness, and the blood, which was also sprinkled on the Ark in Heaven as outlined in Hebrews 9:11, 12. It covered our sins.
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things [a]to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
And the result, as noted above was redemption. We were bought back from the bondage of sin. We are also sanctified. That means "set apart," both to God and from sin. You can say we were purified and most importantly, justified. Made to be sinless, like Jesus.
David continues: Psalm 32:2
How blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no deceit! (HCSB uses "charge with sin.")
Now we can understand and join in the "joy." It is all forgiven, covered. Our debt has been satisfied. Paid in full. (tetelestai!) We are redeemed. And notice the extent of the transformation. David's spirit is no longer deceitful. That implies that the year or so that he was covering up his own sin was a time of deceit and deception.
How good to have a more complete and effective covering. Next time we will explore that more fully. He is a changed man. Hallelujah! We are joyful! (Too.)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans+3%3A23&version=HCSB
Sin is "missing the mark." We have all "missed the mark." (Romans 3:23) Because we have missed the mark, we trespass or cross a boundary. A deliberate crossing would escalate to transgression. It is a presumptuous, deliberate crossing of the line. And iniquity is more deeply rooted. Iniquity means "premeditated choice, continuing without repentance." Yep, David had all of those, as do a few others, me most of all.
All of these are fatal conditions. Romans 6:23 pronounces the death sentence. "Wages of sin is death." "Sin" might be considered the least offensive of the three and if it is worthy of death, then the rest are far more so. If we stop here, the future is bleak and hopeless.
Recall David. He was forgiven, his sin was covered. The rest of the verse, "The gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord." How can we be forgiven of sins, transgressions, and iniquity? We accept the "covering" of Jesus' blood.
During the Tabernacle and Temple worship, the high priest would take the blood of the sacrifice, the Atonement sacrifice, and sprinkle it on the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant, which was within the Holy of Holies. Jesus was our Passover, but Hebrews reassures us that He only needed to die once, so the Passover also covered the Atonement. Hebrews 10 explains:
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God,
The priests offered sacrifices, especially during the feast days, to picture this act that would forgive and cover all of our sins. Since Jesus only had to die once, the Passover offering (April) also counted for the Atonement offering (September/October) which came five or six months later. Jesus made one offering for all sins, for all time.
So in the Atonement ceremony, the High Priest took some of the blood from the sacrifice into the Holy of Holies. The Shekina Glory, representing God's presence hovered between the two cherubim above the top of the Ark itself. This covering was called the "mercy seat" and the law was contained within the body of the Ark. So the blood, sprinkled on the mercy seat literally came between the representation of the Lord and the law which we have broken. The "sin" was covered by the blood.
Jesus' sacrifice was the basis for forgiveness, and the blood, which was also sprinkled on the Ark in Heaven as outlined in Hebrews 9:11, 12. It covered our sins.
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things [a]to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
And the result, as noted above was redemption. We were bought back from the bondage of sin. We are also sanctified. That means "set apart," both to God and from sin. You can say we were purified and most importantly, justified. Made to be sinless, like Jesus.
David continues: Psalm 32:2
How blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no deceit! (HCSB uses "charge with sin.")
Now we can understand and join in the "joy." It is all forgiven, covered. Our debt has been satisfied. Paid in full. (tetelestai!) We are redeemed. And notice the extent of the transformation. David's spirit is no longer deceitful. That implies that the year or so that he was covering up his own sin was a time of deceit and deception.
How good to have a more complete and effective covering. Next time we will explore that more fully. He is a changed man. Hallelujah! We are joyful! (Too.)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans+3%3A23&version=HCSB
Monday, April 3, 2017
Church Battles
Our discussion of James and the troubles he predicted for the church because of their excessive deference to "rich" men reminded me of some church battles I have experienced. Most of the churches I have attended were chosen after a careful, diligent search. Well, maybe two exceptions. My home church was chosen by my Grandad, actually. I am not sure if he was in on the founding of the church, but he was there for a long time.
My Dad went there all his life, and when Jimmy boy came along he went too. I had a drug problem. I was drug to church twice on Sunday, once on Wednesday, and often other days if the doors were open.
The second exception to church choice was the one I attended in college. I did not go to the Big Baptist (Southern, if you please), which most of the college chose. But there was a smaller Alliance church within walking distance and that was the denomination of Home (Dad and Grandad's) church. The church I attended in Longview, Texas, did not, to my knowledge have any difficulties–while I was there, anyway.
The Pastor had just overseen a building program and they seemed to have come through unscathed. He was a great pastor. He left about the time that I graduated and joined Campus Crusade. Coincidentally, he was assigned to Illinois State University and ministered to the woman who would later become my wife. We both have great memories of him.
As an aside, most church battles I am aware of, both personally and though information, have involved very active and effective churches. They were making a difference for the kingdom. It seems like Satan attacks them to blunt their effectiveness for the Kingdom.
How this church escaped might be a good study for church leaders to study. It was very active when I was attending there. We went into the neighborhood on Sunday afternoons to find "unchurched" families. If they indicated that they did not attend church, we invited them to ours.
It was close to them because we did our visiting on foot, being limited by the school and later by finances from having motor vehicles. We did not even have bicycles. I guess someone else invented that method of getting around. The church was strong and making an impact in the neighborhood and city.
My next stop was Iowa City and the church I attended there was another "smaller" church with about 300 attending the morning services on Sunday. Nearly 200 of them were college students from the U of Iowa and other smaller institutions in the area. Again, it had a fantastic pastor and was very influential in the community. He was called to another church, one in Minneapolis, and had an effective ministry there.
The replacement was not a good choice. Several of us voted not to call him, but were overridden by the rest of the church body. He had a great personality and everyone really loved him. But, he did not prepare for his sermons and they were, to be frank, atrocious. The college students, by and large, went other places. The 300 became 100 and to be honest, I was not unhappy to leave when I graduated. Eventually he divided what was left of the church.
My next church was in Peoria, Illinois, and it was a strong, vibrant church. While I was there, it seemed to have minimal, if any problems. Praise the Lord.
Our next church started very strong and was probably averaging over 2000 a week. Long story short, things went badly, and one of the mistakes was putting a "new" member in charge of a special promotion. That went well, but it gave him cachet with a group and that group was largely led into some poor choices. Other factors were leading to a decline in attendance and that was exacerbated by the divisive nature, including a lawsuit, of this guys' approach.
Eventually the church split. It had, by then, dwindled to about 900 and the pastor retired. A new pastor was called to replace him and the replacement proceeded to further divide and destroy the church. He terminated the outreach ministry which had prospered and brought many people both to the church and to the Lord during the time of trouble. He explained that it was "too intrusive to actually call and go to peoples' homes." Other factors also weighed on the situation.
We decided not to be divisive and chose to go elsewhere, as many of our friends had done. It was about 600 when we left, but that was with a claimed 300 new members who joined after the church went "contemporary" and pretty much abandoned expository preaching. Math equates to 900 when he came, plus 300 added, equals a total of 600. That means he drove about 600 away to gain 300.
Back to James. One of the factors in this and many church failure was the preference afforded to a "rich man." The guy just referenced was a businessman and seemingly successful. I wondered that a new member would be given charge of the all-church program, Rick Warren's 40 days.
Now let's turn our attention to my home church. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it had problems also. From the time I was aware of "church business" I noted that no pastor had stayed more than four years. They went on to other churches and were amazingly successful. Dad did not tell us kids much about church affairs, but we were able to keep track of progress as we attended the business meetings. (Remember that I went whenever the doors were open? That included business meetings as well as special events and SingSpirations.)
The church "voted" whether to "extend the call" of the pastor. (Aside: I always wondered at that. If God had called the pastor, why did we have to vote? Wouldn't the Lord tell him when it was time to move? The votes invariably went from almost unanimous to abut 2/3's to less than half.) At that point the pastor would begin to candidate at other churches and left.
We had one guy, after I left for college, who refused to go. There were several members who were quite vocal and even overt in their opposition. One in particular kept coming to services, but would not even speak to him. Stratton was a small town, so it was literally impossible not to encounter people in the post office, drug store, grocery store, and even on the street. Their behavior was obvious and ugly.
One day, they were out in their yard digging a hole. They lived close to the church and the pastor happened by. (It was a small town, as I mentioned. Everyone was "close" except those of us who lived out on farms.) He asked what they were doing, and they told him that the water main to their house had broken. The "city"(big town) would charge them to dig it up and replace it.
So they were digging it themselves to save the money. Pastor went home, got his shovel and came back to help. He jumped into the hole and was digging right along with the man. Nothing was said. When they finished, they said, "Thank you."
Next Sunday, you would have thought that they were best buddies. They complimented him on the sermon and were effusive in praise for how great a pastor the church had. I guess Pastor Knick had read the sermon about "doing unto others." He quoted every verse that he preached on, and honestly his sermons were mostly Scripture. "Scripture explains Scripture," he told me one time when I was back. "So there is not much I need to say."
His life said a lot. Maybe our church battles need a few "broken water mains" to help resolve matters. The Lord is grieved when we fight. 1 Corinthians 6 summarizes what James was saying.
Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life?
That does not require any explanation. Paul is horrified that they could not resolve church matters in the church. He continues. They were turning to outsiders to resolve family issues. Ones who have no understanding or authority in the church.
4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, 6 but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
Can't you just hear the irony and sarcasm? And his broken heart continued.
7 Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
Church battles are not pleasing to the Lord, nor do they promote the Kingdom. Maybe they like they needed a broken water main or two. And the problems probably stem from showing favoritism.
My Dad went there all his life, and when Jimmy boy came along he went too. I had a drug problem. I was drug to church twice on Sunday, once on Wednesday, and often other days if the doors were open.
The second exception to church choice was the one I attended in college. I did not go to the Big Baptist (Southern, if you please), which most of the college chose. But there was a smaller Alliance church within walking distance and that was the denomination of Home (Dad and Grandad's) church. The church I attended in Longview, Texas, did not, to my knowledge have any difficulties–while I was there, anyway.
The Pastor had just overseen a building program and they seemed to have come through unscathed. He was a great pastor. He left about the time that I graduated and joined Campus Crusade. Coincidentally, he was assigned to Illinois State University and ministered to the woman who would later become my wife. We both have great memories of him.
As an aside, most church battles I am aware of, both personally and though information, have involved very active and effective churches. They were making a difference for the kingdom. It seems like Satan attacks them to blunt their effectiveness for the Kingdom.
How this church escaped might be a good study for church leaders to study. It was very active when I was attending there. We went into the neighborhood on Sunday afternoons to find "unchurched" families. If they indicated that they did not attend church, we invited them to ours.
It was close to them because we did our visiting on foot, being limited by the school and later by finances from having motor vehicles. We did not even have bicycles. I guess someone else invented that method of getting around. The church was strong and making an impact in the neighborhood and city.
My next stop was Iowa City and the church I attended there was another "smaller" church with about 300 attending the morning services on Sunday. Nearly 200 of them were college students from the U of Iowa and other smaller institutions in the area. Again, it had a fantastic pastor and was very influential in the community. He was called to another church, one in Minneapolis, and had an effective ministry there.
The replacement was not a good choice. Several of us voted not to call him, but were overridden by the rest of the church body. He had a great personality and everyone really loved him. But, he did not prepare for his sermons and they were, to be frank, atrocious. The college students, by and large, went other places. The 300 became 100 and to be honest, I was not unhappy to leave when I graduated. Eventually he divided what was left of the church.
My next church was in Peoria, Illinois, and it was a strong, vibrant church. While I was there, it seemed to have minimal, if any problems. Praise the Lord.
Our next church started very strong and was probably averaging over 2000 a week. Long story short, things went badly, and one of the mistakes was putting a "new" member in charge of a special promotion. That went well, but it gave him cachet with a group and that group was largely led into some poor choices. Other factors were leading to a decline in attendance and that was exacerbated by the divisive nature, including a lawsuit, of this guys' approach.
Eventually the church split. It had, by then, dwindled to about 900 and the pastor retired. A new pastor was called to replace him and the replacement proceeded to further divide and destroy the church. He terminated the outreach ministry which had prospered and brought many people both to the church and to the Lord during the time of trouble. He explained that it was "too intrusive to actually call and go to peoples' homes." Other factors also weighed on the situation.
We decided not to be divisive and chose to go elsewhere, as many of our friends had done. It was about 600 when we left, but that was with a claimed 300 new members who joined after the church went "contemporary" and pretty much abandoned expository preaching. Math equates to 900 when he came, plus 300 added, equals a total of 600. That means he drove about 600 away to gain 300.
Back to James. One of the factors in this and many church failure was the preference afforded to a "rich man." The guy just referenced was a businessman and seemingly successful. I wondered that a new member would be given charge of the all-church program, Rick Warren's 40 days.
Now let's turn our attention to my home church. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it had problems also. From the time I was aware of "church business" I noted that no pastor had stayed more than four years. They went on to other churches and were amazingly successful. Dad did not tell us kids much about church affairs, but we were able to keep track of progress as we attended the business meetings. (Remember that I went whenever the doors were open? That included business meetings as well as special events and SingSpirations.)
The church "voted" whether to "extend the call" of the pastor. (Aside: I always wondered at that. If God had called the pastor, why did we have to vote? Wouldn't the Lord tell him when it was time to move? The votes invariably went from almost unanimous to abut 2/3's to less than half.) At that point the pastor would begin to candidate at other churches and left.
We had one guy, after I left for college, who refused to go. There were several members who were quite vocal and even overt in their opposition. One in particular kept coming to services, but would not even speak to him. Stratton was a small town, so it was literally impossible not to encounter people in the post office, drug store, grocery store, and even on the street. Their behavior was obvious and ugly.
One day, they were out in their yard digging a hole. They lived close to the church and the pastor happened by. (It was a small town, as I mentioned. Everyone was "close" except those of us who lived out on farms.) He asked what they were doing, and they told him that the water main to their house had broken. The "city"(big town) would charge them to dig it up and replace it.
So they were digging it themselves to save the money. Pastor went home, got his shovel and came back to help. He jumped into the hole and was digging right along with the man. Nothing was said. When they finished, they said, "Thank you."
Next Sunday, you would have thought that they were best buddies. They complimented him on the sermon and were effusive in praise for how great a pastor the church had. I guess Pastor Knick had read the sermon about "doing unto others." He quoted every verse that he preached on, and honestly his sermons were mostly Scripture. "Scripture explains Scripture," he told me one time when I was back. "So there is not much I need to say."
His life said a lot. Maybe our church battles need a few "broken water mains" to help resolve matters. The Lord is grieved when we fight. 1 Corinthians 6 summarizes what James was saying.
Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life?
That does not require any explanation. Paul is horrified that they could not resolve church matters in the church. He continues. They were turning to outsiders to resolve family issues. Ones who have no understanding or authority in the church.
4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, 6 but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
Can't you just hear the irony and sarcasm? And his broken heart continued.
7 Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
Church battles are not pleasing to the Lord, nor do they promote the Kingdom. Maybe they like they needed a broken water main or two. And the problems probably stem from showing favoritism.
The Rich Man: Favoritism
The Rich Man: Favoritism
(As I was typing this, my fat fingers hit several keys and R$ich came up. Propitious?)
A recent sermon quoted James who warns us not to give preference or precedence to rich men who join our assembly. James 2:2, 3 warns against "paying special attention" to the man with fine clothes. Incidentally, this does not call the man "rich." In verse 1 the description is wearing "a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes." He had the trappings or clothes of a rich person, but that is just the outward appearance.
That could be another study in and of itself. Today we want to focus on the church's response. Notice James' description of the usher's greeting, evidently with the blessing of the congregation:
...you pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, "You sit here in a good place."
He goes on with "instructions" or greetings to the (evidently) poor man:
"You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,"
In verse 6 James essentially "reads them the riot act."
Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court? 7 Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which you have been called?
The church was bending over backwards to honor enemies of the faith. They oppressed individual believers and the corporate body. Even today, they just cause trouble. Note the specific charge: "drag you into court." Further they blaspheme Christ's Name. That is what it means when James uses "the fair name by which you have been called."
The radio speaker expanded the meaning by pointing out that James was referring to the "Name spoken over you." That happens when we are baptized. "I baptize you in the Name of...."
The allure of the wealthy leads people to literally work against their own best interests and those of the Lord. How can we be so dumb? And sadly, that is not difficult to find examples. Most of us probably know of churches that had "trouble," and often it is caused by a seeming "rich man."
They often "join" a church and are immediately appointed to a prominent post. In spite of Paul's warning to Timothy, these new people are promoted into leadership positions. (1 Timothy 5:22) "Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily." Paul meant ordination or installing as leadership when he said, "lay hands."
Often these relatively new, whether young in the faith or not is debatable, members are placed into leadership positions and proceed to cause problems. Some churches have literally gone to court, as James warns. The result is often split churches and damaged ministries.
His point, besides being wise in whom you trust to lead, is to treat everyone as you would like to be treated. I read of a new pastor who entered his church on his first Sunday as a homeless man. (The elders knew of his ruse.) This was a visual message to the church about how they respond to the situation James presented. His church failed, but I am sure that it was the last time they did.
If we turn someone away and turn them off to the Lord by our actions, we will face judgment. Jesus said that as we do to the least of these, we are doing to Him. (Matthew 25 tells the story.)
Or to put it another way, as some famous Preacher once said, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." James merely gave us a flesh and blood example.
(As I was typing this, my fat fingers hit several keys and R$ich came up. Propitious?)
A recent sermon quoted James who warns us not to give preference or precedence to rich men who join our assembly. James 2:2, 3 warns against "paying special attention" to the man with fine clothes. Incidentally, this does not call the man "rich." In verse 1 the description is wearing "a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes." He had the trappings or clothes of a rich person, but that is just the outward appearance.
That could be another study in and of itself. Today we want to focus on the church's response. Notice James' description of the usher's greeting, evidently with the blessing of the congregation:
...you pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, "You sit here in a good place."
He goes on with "instructions" or greetings to the (evidently) poor man:
"You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,"
In verse 6 James essentially "reads them the riot act."
Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court? 7 Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which you have been called?
The church was bending over backwards to honor enemies of the faith. They oppressed individual believers and the corporate body. Even today, they just cause trouble. Note the specific charge: "drag you into court." Further they blaspheme Christ's Name. That is what it means when James uses "the fair name by which you have been called."
The radio speaker expanded the meaning by pointing out that James was referring to the "Name spoken over you." That happens when we are baptized. "I baptize you in the Name of...."
The allure of the wealthy leads people to literally work against their own best interests and those of the Lord. How can we be so dumb? And sadly, that is not difficult to find examples. Most of us probably know of churches that had "trouble," and often it is caused by a seeming "rich man."
They often "join" a church and are immediately appointed to a prominent post. In spite of Paul's warning to Timothy, these new people are promoted into leadership positions. (1 Timothy 5:22) "Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily." Paul meant ordination or installing as leadership when he said, "lay hands."
Often these relatively new, whether young in the faith or not is debatable, members are placed into leadership positions and proceed to cause problems. Some churches have literally gone to court, as James warns. The result is often split churches and damaged ministries.
His point, besides being wise in whom you trust to lead, is to treat everyone as you would like to be treated. I read of a new pastor who entered his church on his first Sunday as a homeless man. (The elders knew of his ruse.) This was a visual message to the church about how they respond to the situation James presented. His church failed, but I am sure that it was the last time they did.
If we turn someone away and turn them off to the Lord by our actions, we will face judgment. Jesus said that as we do to the least of these, we are doing to Him. (Matthew 25 tells the story.)
Or to put it another way, as some famous Preacher once said, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." James merely gave us a flesh and blood example.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)