This Sunday, the message was from Galatians 3:13. Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, because it is written: Everyone who is hung on a tree is cursed.
I considered showing part of the following video during the service, but there wasn't time. So here it is as a follow-up. The entire almost 19 minutes of it is awesome. Seriously, I've watched it or listened to it probably ten times or more over the last few months. But the specific part that ties into our sermon Scripture begins at 13:56. Hope you take time to watch!
I agree with the author's criticisms of certain parts of our justice system. I find his theology sloppy and incomplete.
Our jails are overflowing, people are receiving life sentences for minor crimes under three strikes laws, racial disparities leave minority populations disproportionately represented in the incarcerated population, and we’re so obsessed with killing that we’re now using untested concoctions of drugs that recently took a condemned inmate more than 20 minutes to finally die.
Our system isn’t working.
I can agree with this
It might surprise you however, to understand how we arrived at such a broken justice system.
We got here because of poor theology.
While we do have a separation of church and state, it is undeniable that through the ages Christian theology has influenced laws, patterns of thinking, and social structures — especially in early America.
Of course I agree that theology has had this sort of influence. I don't know about the history of the penal system, and some of the comments that follow the article bring the author's order of influence into question, but I don't have the historical background to support or oppose the connection. I do, however, deny that the theology in question is "poor" as the author defines it.
One such theology is a theology of the cross. In theological circles we call it “atonement theology,” which has been an area of theology that has been consistently morphing for the past 2000 years. You and I most likely grew up with one specific type of atonement theology which has tended to dominate the landscape since the 16th century or so — an atonement metaphor called “penal substitution.”
Here is where I think the sloppiness begins. Atonement theology is about how humanity can be reconciled to God. To equate "theology of the cross" and "atonement theology" is to set us up for at least two errors. The first is to put us in an either/or situation because we have (unintentionally, perhaps) essentially said that God was doing only one thing(or at the most, two things) on the cross. He was either paying a penalty or He was defeating the works of the devil and reconciling creation to Himself. The Scriptural reality is that all of these things and more were at work. The second error this sloppiness sets us up for is the error of circular reasoning. If an atonement theory explains how God reconciled us to Himself, then for the author to suggest that his (better) atonement theory is that (instead of penal substitution) God was in Jesus reconciling the world to Himself, he has really not provided an atonement theory, only restated what an atonement theory is about. God reconciled us by reconciling us.
If you grew up within conservative evangelicalism or have seen even one episode of Way of the Master, you are familiar with the penal substitution theory of atonement even if you don’t recognize the theological name I’m using for it. It usually isn’t described as an “atonement metaphor” but rather is passed off as the “Gospel” itself.
A provocative statement, that last one. I suppose all of our language about salvation (even the word salvation) is metaphorical, but this is what God has given us to work with. He is the author of the metaphors we use. I've used any number of metaphors in explaining the gospel from the pulpit, freedom from bondage, healing from sickness, rescue from lostness... There probably ARE those who use only one metaphor and don't even recognize that's what it is (analogous to the preacher who explained the symbolic language "present yourself a living sacrifice" by saying you have to "crawl on the altar"), but to identify that ignorant way of using the penal substitution metaphor as the only way it is used is either uninformed or deceitful.
It goes something like this (if you grew up a fundie, you might remember “Romans Road” to explain it):
– Everyone has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (true)
– The wages of sin is death (also true)
– Sin can only be forgiven through someone/something dying (not exactly true — even in the OT sacrifices only satisfied unintentional sins, not deliberate ones. We also see Jesus forgive people in the New Testament prior to the cross, showing God is able to gratuitously forgive without a blood sacrifice.)
The penal substitution theory doesn't say that sin can only be forgiven through someone dying at the same time as the extension of the forgiveness. It says that the death of Jesus on the cross makes forgiveness available across all centuries. I also disagree that sacrifices only satisfied unintentional sins. The Leviticus 16 description of the Day of Atonement specifically includes rebellious acts in the list of what is atoned for.
– When Jesus was on the cross, he was paying your fine/being punished in your place so that you could be set free (not quite true, or at least distorted/reduced).
It IS true. 1 Peter 3:18 says "Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous..."
Essentially, the cross is explained exclusively in legal terms.
No, penal substitution is explained exclusively in legal terms. Any preacher/teacher/bible student worth his/her salt knows that other things were happening on the cross at the same time.
You and I are the criminal, God is the blood-thirsty judge and executioner, and Jesus becomes the one who steps in between us and lets the angry judge beat and kill him in our place.
No presentation of the gospel I have ever heard represented God as bloodthirsty. The language used here seems intended to make penal substitution seem to be beneath God and unworthy of true theology.
Having killed an innocent person, this judge is somehow satisfied and a little less angry, so he sets friends of the innocent dead man free as he awaits the “end times” when he’ll finally get to let the bodies hit the floor and feel good about himself.
This is just ridiculous. God's wrath is entirely satisfied relative to those who are covered by the atonement of Christ. He is not "a little less angry." He is still full of wrath toward the unrepentant, and has ZERO wrath for those who repent. He need not wait for anything to "feel good about himself." This representation of penal substitution is a wonderful example of a straw man argument.
It’s actually quite twisted when you break it down.
Well, sure, when you put it like the author has...
Jesus protects us from God? Or, if you accept the inspiration of Scripture (which I 100 percent do), it gets even more uncomfortable when you see Jesus say things like: “If you have seen me, you have seen the father, for we are one,” or in Hebrews, when it is stated that Jesus is the “exact representation of God’s being.”
Accepting both the inspiration of Scripture and the penal substitution theory of the atonement, one could actually say that Jesus died to protect us from Jesus.
Which is quite silly, really — from one aspect this makes God look schizophrenic,
This just (to me) goes to show how shallow the author's comprehension of Scripture is. God's justice and mercy come together on the cross in order to show us how utterly undeserved the grace of salvation is. Certainly, we all fail to comprehend the full nature of God, but this author misses some of the most fundamental aspects (in my opinion) of the Scriptural narrative which spans both covenants. If you don't have room in your theology for a God who absorbs His own wrath then you miss a core component of the Gospel.
and on the other, it makes the cross look like a bad case of domestic violence — something I personally find offensive.
I have seen this characterization before. The author takes the metaphor of father and son, and use the human relationship to critique the Divine relationship. This would be like me saying that someone who claimed to be "hungry as a lion" was lying if they ate a bowl of cereal instead of raw zebra. You can't take the Trinity and judge Them based on human categories. God pouring His wrath on Christ is not child abuse.
Many of us grew up with this understanding of the cross, yet were never told that this was not the way Christians had historically understood the atonement. This idea began to emerge about 1,000 years ago when people began to view the cross as God having his honor “satisfied” (called the “satisfaction theory”), and about another 500 years later it morphed into the concept that God had to punish Jesus in our place in order to forgive us — a concept that has remained the dominant understanding in most evangelical circles. (I believe this is largely in part to some of the dominant theologians of the reformation periods having backgrounds as attorneys prior to becoming theologians, which gives shape to why they would have preferred to understand the cross in terms of legalities, punishment, etc.)
This is a red herring. Such and such has only been a widely held position since such and such time. It's like me saying: Well, the idea that the statement "all men are created equal" implies that women should have the right to vote is a relatively recent idea. The earliest leaders of our nation did not hold such a view.
Of course, we would say to that, "so what?" When the view came into vogue isn't important. What is important is its truth or falsehood. Concerning the matter at hand, the legal background of the reformers isn't nearly as relevant as the question "Did Paul say in Romans 5 that Christ died for the ungodly?"
Historically, Christians had seen the cross as (a) defeating the works of the Devil (1 John 3:8) and that (b) God was in Jesus reconciling all of creation back to himself (Col 1:20). Yet, somehow a beautiful picture of defeating evil and reconciling creation got turned into this idea that God is so angry that he must have his anger satisfied by killing an innocent person.
A recognition of penal substitution doesn't rule out a recognition of these other aspects of Christ's work.
Penal substitution then, causes us to see God’s justice satisfied not because Jesus restored us but because Jesus was properly punished.
Here is more sloppiness. Not once in Scripture does justice come from being restored, but SINCE justice has been satisfied, we are restored. "Punishment for our peace was on Him." (Isaiah 53:5) Jesus being punished is not at odds with us being restored; it is the means by which it is accomplished.
How does this play into America’s broken justice system you ask?
For 500 years we have focused our understanding of God and God’s justice as the need for punishment instead of the need for reconciliation, and this has led to a broken framework in our country in regards to justice.
God's justice is making things right. It is (1) restoring the injured and (2) punishing the injurer. Psalm 9:16 The Lord has revealed Himself; He has executed justice, striking down the wicked by the work of their hands. Psalm 10:18 doing justice for the fatherless and the oppressed so that men of the earth may terrify them no more.
When we allow this broken framework to influence the application of justice (as we have) we see criminal acts in terms of “need to punish as justice” instead of “need to restore as justice”
The author here either (1) confuses the two aspects of justice I listed above or (2) confuses justice with other aspects of God's character, like mercy or compassion.
(a poor theological understanding that I also feel has led to an evangelical culture of spanking).
No, agree with it or not, the source of the evangelical "culture of spanking" is the book of Proverbs.
Yes, there are many criminal acts that require a person to be removed from society for their protection and for ours, but this theological framework has caused us to view “justice served” when a person receives what we feel is an appropriate sentence instead of seeing “justice served” when both the offender and the offended (even if that’s just society in general) have had their lives reconciled (perhaps not with each other, but in a general sense).
Justice becomes punishment, not healing and restoration.
Justice and reconciliation are different things. Both have their place in theology. They may both have their place in how we deal with criminals, but they are not identical.
And so, our prisons are overflowing. Why? Because our theological framework has told us that justice can only be satisfied when someone has been properly and fully punished, instead of telling us that justice is most fully satisfied when a life has been restored . The justice we seek in society today all gets traced back to how we view the justice of the cross.
The fact that our prison system has now become de facto mental institutions for individuals who are ill reveals that we are focused on justice as punishment, not justice as restoration and healing.
The fact that we have elderly people in the prison system who look nothing like the act they committed 70 years past — but yet will never see the light of day — tells us that we see justice as punishment meted not as a life changed.
I believe this is largely because we have misunderstood God as someone who will only be satisfied when he has his pound of flesh, and so we do these things and call it “justice served” when in reality, it is “justice broken.”
This a mischaracterization of the holiness and wrath of God.
The cross wasn’t about an angry god who needed to get punches in to be satisfied, but rather about a loving God who was reversing the narrative and sending the story in the direction of restoration and healing. It wasn’t a horrific act of divine child abuse, but a beautiful act of reconciliation.
It was about an angry God who was reversing the narrative. It's not either or, but both (without the perversions the author inserts like "divine child abuse")
However, since we’ve understood the cross in terms of punitive justice, we push forward a culture that is drunk on punitive justice — thus arriving at our current predicament.
The reality is that the cross was an act of restorative justice — God was reconciling everything to God's self, and in turn, inviting us to become what Paul called “ministers of reconciliation” — people who go forth and reconcile lives as Jesus reconciled lives.
In order to fix America’s broken framework in regards to justice, we must recover a holistic understanding of what happened on the cross and no longer reduce and distort it into to a punitive legal action. If we do this, we just might begin to build a culture that is hyper focused not on punishing people, but restoring lives.
The greatest irony of the article is here. It is the author who is dismantling a "holistic" understanding of what happened on the cross by choosing to reject portions and embrace only part of the truth.
Continuing the story from the Gospels...tonight it's Luke 1:26-38...
In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man named Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. And the angel came to her and said, “Rejoice, favored woman! The Lord is with you.” But she was deeply troubled by this statement, wondering what kind of greeting this could be. Then the angel told her: Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Now listen: You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you will call His name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end. Mary asked the angel, “How can this be, since I have not been intimate with a man?” The angel replied to her: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, the holy One to be born will be called the Son of God. And consider your relative Elizabeth—even she has conceived a son in her old age, and this is the sixth month for her who was called childless. For nothing will be impossible with God.” “I am the Lord’s slave,” said Mary. “May it be done to me according to your word.” Then the angel left her. [HCSB]
In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to the Galilean village of Nazareth to a virgin engaged to be married to a man descended from David. His name was Joseph, and the virgin’s name, Mary. Upon entering, Gabriel greeted her: Good morning! You’re beautiful with God’s beauty, Beautiful inside and out! God be with you. She was thoroughly shaken, wondering what was behind a greeting like that. But the angel assured her, “Mary, you have nothing to fear. God has a surprise for you: You will become pregnant and give birth to a son and call his name Jesus. He will be great, be called ‘Son of the Highest.’ The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David; He will rule Jacob’s house forever— no end, ever, to his kingdom.” Mary said to the angel, “But how? I’ve never slept with a man.” The angel answered, The Holy Spirit will come upon you, the power of the Highest hover over you; Therefore, the child you bring to birth will be called Holy, Son of God. “And did you know that your cousin Elizabeth conceived a son, old as she is? Everyone called her barren, and here she is six months pregnant! Nothing, you see, is impossible with God.” And Mary said, Yes, I see it all now: I’m the Lord’s maid, ready to serve. Let it be with me just as you say. Then the angel left her. [MSG]
The first thing I notice tonight in this passage is that the destiny of Jesus is first described here as being the KING. (Unless you count the name Jesus=Yeshua=Joshua=Yoshua=YHWY saves) I've been looking with our church on Wednesday nights at a possible purpose statement/mission statement for EHBC. Nothing new, really, simply a restatement of the classic "5 purposes," but we've been looking at it in terms of the church being a visible expression of the Kingdom of God.
EHBC exists to express the Kingdom of God: to worship the King, submit to His rule, keep His unity, proclaim His Gospel, and extend His blessings. [expanded version] Eastern Heights exists to be a visible expression of the Kingdom of God as it subverts the kingdoms of this world. We do this by worshiping the King individually and corporately, growing both in our submission to His rule and also in our reflection of His character, making every effort to maintain unity as a Kingdom community, proclaiming the good news of the Kingdom to the world, and extending the blessings of the Kingdom to those in need through both natural and supernatural means as His Spirit enables us. By the way, I'm pretty sure we can make the acronym CROWN work for this theme, but I haven't worked it out exactly: C community R reach or rehearse or relate O obedience W worship N news or needs umm.... don't quite have it...would like them all nouns or all verbs, too...any ideas?
Nearly 20 years ago I went to a driving range. The guys I worked with (in construction, believe it or not) were talking about golf and it sounded like fun. I'm a preacher, lots of preachers play golf, so it seemed a natural fit. I was advised to go to a driving range to take my first baby steps. If I remember right, I only went once. After that, I decided I would never learn to play golf.
Not because I couldn't. But because I only have so many years, so many days, so many hours to do the work my life is supposed to be about, and I was convinced in a very short time that the number of hours, days, years I would have to put into getting any good at golf was more than I was willing to give.
Now, I may have been right or wrong in my assessment of what golf would demand from me, but conceptually, I think that was one of the wisest decisions I have ever made. The problem is, I have to keep making it.
Not about golf. I've never looked back. But my personality is such that I tend to get too absorbed in things. For a while it was Magic: The Gathering, a collectible card game. I spent countless hours sorting, analyzing, prioritizing, deckbuilding, playtesting... until I realized that this game was doing what I had feared golf would do: taking too much of my life. More recently it was the show 24 on Netflix. I don't even know how many different games, books, whatever have sucked me in, to the point that I had to intentionally step back.
Somewhere between last night and tonight I have had an epiphany about magic, not identical to the one about golf, but not entirely unrelated. I started watching a show (on Netflix, again) about a magician named Rick Jay. (Incidentally, before that I didn't know him as a magician, but I had seen him in the movie The Heist, with Gene Hackman. I'm not a big fan of movies where the heroes are really bad guys, but as those kind of movies go, this one was about my favorite. But I digress...)
The movie about him as a magician was listing all these wonderful magicians from the past that had mentored him over the years. Cardini, and Slydini, and others that I'm simply not versed enough in magic history to recognize yet. And I was thinking about all the knowledge that was shared with this guy, and all the hours, days, and years that he has poured into learning his craft, and I realized something.
I will never be a great magician. Or a famous magician. Or (especially) a great, famous magician. Like golf, it would take too much of my life. I had to chew on that for a moment. I hadn't ever consciously set a goal to be any of those things, but even the option to pursue those goals was taken away from me with such a crystalline clarity that it left me a little sad. Because unlike golf, I love magic.
Now I'm over the sadness and on to more of a thoughtful stage. Because (also unlike golf) magic is not something I have to give up altogether. Doing magic doesn't take up too much time--at least, not in my opinion--but becoming great in magic, I think that would. So now I'm left with the question: If becoming great and/or famous as a magician isn't my goal, then what should my magic goal(s) be?
Before I can answer that question, I need to answer another one: what is my magic for? (I sound like a character in a Xanth novel.) With just a moment of thought, I come up with four things my magic is for.
1. Ministry. I use my magic in church and evangelistic settings. This is occasional, as the opportunity arises, and with no great plan or strategy. Maybe that should change. Maybe I should spend an hour a week doing street magic evangelism, or children's floor hospital ministry. Maybe that will change this year. But for now, just as a general idea of ministry-facilitating magic, I have enough skill, knowledge and equipment (allowing for the need to restock consumable items) to last the rest of my life. I don't NEED to learn or buy any new stuff to do church gigs, because, at least for now, there aren't usually any repeat shows for the same audience.
2. Money. I sometimes get paid to do a birthday party, school event, etc. For this too, I'm pretty much set for life, except that some of my children's props are worn out and need replacing.
3. Me. I just like magic. I want to continue to learn it at some pace, just for my own personal satisfaction.
4. Thursdays. (It's a shame it's not Mondays. I could have kept up the alliteration.) At the school where I teach, I have established a pattern of sharing a magic trick on Thursday at the midmorning break. Certainly, I have collected enough books, DVDs, etc., to cover this for years to come, if only I will actually put the time into learning.
This discussion is certainly not comprehensive, but these thoughts, and others I haven't typed, point toward certain POSSIBLE goals.
1. To craft one or more shows. I usually get a gig and as it gets close to time for the performance I "raid" my magic supplies to see what I can pull together. I want to thoughtfully plan out a show. I want to nail down what the show will contain, rehearse the show AS a show, pack the show in a case, and have it ready to go! Maybe eventually have more than one--one for young children, one for older, one for churches, etc.
2. To add a new performance area to my repertoire each year to make myself more marketable for paying shows. I want to learn balloon animals in 2014. I have instructional DVDs...just haven't spent the time in doing the learning.
3. To learn or solidify one new trick each week for my Thursday students.
4. Eventually, I would like to create my own magic, and perhaps generate some income from it, but this is elusive, and I don't know if it can count as a goal...more like an aspiration.
5. I would like to create a website to help magicians evaluate tricks and plan shows. Sort of a cross between a wiki and a database...I'll need a website programmer's help for that...conacting my brother-in-law to see if he's interested. This, too, could eventually become a profitable endeavor, but I don't know how much time it will take.
6. I want to pray about becoming more intentional about using magic in ministry and evangelism...nothing specific here yet, but I really could see spending an hour a week at the hospital doing tricks for kids. Maybe even connecting with other Christian magicians to create a ministry team...
Well, if you've read this far and you're not married to me, I hope you weren't entirely disappointed at this glimpse into my own journey. Just in case you feel cheated, here's a little something to make it up to you...
My next passage is Luke 1:5-25, which doesn't necessarily teach me about Jesus Himself, but I don't want to skip over it, so I'll just mine it a paragraph at a time for what wealth it provides...
In the days of King Herod of Judea, there was a priest of Abijah’s division named Zechariah. His wife was from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. Both were righteous in God’s sight, living without blame according to all the commands and requirements of the Lord. But they had no children because Elizabeth could not conceive, and both of them were well along in years. [HCSB]
During the rule of Herod, King of Judea, there was a priest assigned service in the regiment of Abijah. His name was Zachariah. His wife was descended from the daughters of Aaron. Her name was Elizabeth. Together they lived honorably before God, careful in keeping to the ways of the commandments and enjoying a clear conscience before God. But they were childless because Elizabeth could never conceive, and now they were quite old. [MSG]
My customary note on this paragraph is that this couple was childless though they were righteous in God's sight, and that we need to avoid the errors of Job's friends, who assumed that bad circumstances automatically meant God's judgment for sin. But this time as I read this I think, wait a minute... "righteous in God's sight, living without blame according to all the commands and requirements of the Lord."?!?!? I thought you couldn't do that. I thought that's why we need a savior. What's the deal?
Then I remember that God made much the same claim about Job. “Have you considered My servant Job? No one else on earth is like him, a man of perfect integrity, who fears God and turns away from evil.” And Paul, who called himself the "worst" of sinners [1 Tim 1:15], also said that he was, "regarding the righteousness that is in the law, blameless."
There are other verses we could look at, but these are enough to draw this conclusion: you could keep every law God ever gave, and still be a sinner in need of a savior. One of the primary teaching missions of Jesus was to help people see that God's concern for sin went beyond the mere letter of the law. This is one reason when we focus in our religion on our need to "do better," we are missing the point of the gospel. The one who does not steal may covet. The one who does not commit adultery may lust. We are all sinners. We all need Jesus.
When his division was on duty and he was serving as priest before God, it happened that he was chosen by lot, according to the custom of the priesthood, to enter the sanctuary of the Lord and burn incense. At the hour of incense the whole assembly of the people was praying outside. An angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing to the right of the altar of incense. When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and overcome with fear. But the angel said to him: Do not be afraid, Zechariah, because your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will name him John. There will be joy and delight for you, and many will rejoice at his birth. For he will be great in the sight of the Lord and will never drink wine or beer. He will be filled with the Holy Spirit while still in his mother’s womb. He will turn many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God. And he will go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of fathers to their children, and the disobedient to the understanding of the righteous, to make ready for the Lord a prepared people. “How can I know this?” Zechariah asked the angel. “For I am an old man, and my wife is well along in years.” [HCSB]
It so happened that as Zachariah was carrying out his priestly duties before God, working the shift assigned to his regiment, it came his one turn in life to enter the sanctuary of God and burn incense. The congregation was gathered and praying outside the Temple at the hour of the incense offering. Unannounced, an angel of God appeared just to the right of the altar of incense. Zachariah was paralyzed in fear. But the angel reassured him, “Don’t fear, Zachariah. Your prayer has been heard. Elizabeth, your wife, will bear a son by you. You are to name him John. You’re going to leap like a gazelle for joy, and not only you—many will delight in his birth. He’ll achieve great stature with God. “He’ll drink neither wine nor beer. He’ll be filled with the Holy Spirit from the moment he leaves his mother’s womb. He will turn many sons and daughters of Israel back to their God. He will herald God’s arrival in the style and strength of Elijah, soften the hearts of parents to children, and kindle devout understanding among hardened skeptics—he’ll get the people ready for God.” Zachariah said to the angel, “Do you expect me to believe this? I’m an old man and my wife is an old woman.” [MSG]
Among the things that John will do is this: He will turn the hearts of fathers to their children. What kind of time was this, then, when such turning was needed on a large scale? Are we not in such a time again today? So many fathers, and mothers, who walk out on their families... The Gospel of the Kingdom is as relevant today as it ever was.
The angel answered him, “I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God, and I was sent to speak to you and tell you this good news. Now listen! You will become silent and unable to speak until the day these things take place, because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their proper time.” [HCSB]
But the angel said, “I am Gabriel, the sentinel of God, sent especially to bring you this glad news. But because you won’t believe me, you’ll be unable to say a word until the day of your son’s birth. Every word I’ve spoken to you will come true on time—God’s time.” [MSG]
I don't think I've ever met an angel, though I can't be sure. Certainly, none has ever made any kind of pronouncement to me about what I was supposed to do next. But I would like to think that if one did, I'd listen. I spoke with a pastor friend of mine and asked him if a message from an angel would have as much authority in his life as Scripture does, and he said no. I think we have to be ready to hear from God however He chooses to speak to us.
Meanwhile, the people were waiting for Zechariah, amazed that he stayed so long in the sanctuary. When he did come out, he could not speak to them. Then they realized that he had seen a vision in the sanctuary. He kept making signs to them and remained speechless. When the days of his ministry were completed, he went back home. [HCSB]
Meanwhile, the congregation waiting for Zachariah was getting restless, wondering what was keeping him so long in the sanctuary. When he came out and couldn’t speak, they knew he had seen a vision. He continued speechless and had to use sign language with the people. When the course of his priestly assignment was completed, he went back home. [MSG]
God interrupted the "normal" ministry of the day. I for one, would be happy for God to disrupt our Sunday morning expectations, how about you?
After these days his wife Elizabeth conceived and kept herself in seclusion for five months. She said, “The Lord has done this for me. He has looked with favor in these days to take away my disgrace among the people.” [HCSB]
It wasn’t long before his wife, Elizabeth, conceived. She went off by herself for five months, relishing her pregnancy. “So, this is how God acts to remedy my unfortunate condition!” she said. [MSG]
Yay, God! The God Who decrees and fulfills, Who gives life and calls it back to Himself, Who establishes boundaries and brushes them aside, Who hears every prayer, knows every hurt, and loves every heart. Glory to His name! He is wonderful, and worthy to be praised!!! He is the one and only living, eternal, all-wise King, infinite in justice and mercy, able to caress the weakest among us and crush the strongest. Though I may know Him only faintly, though I may strain to hear His voice and miss it more than not, though I may only comprehend fragments of His plan, still He is my God and He will be mine to worship forever and ever! Amen.
Ok, so I found a chronology of the life of Jesus that I like better than the gospel harmony I was using. Today, I'm looking at Matthew 1:1-17. Boring stuff, hunh? Well, here's a video that will leave you unable to look at those verses the same way ever again...
So here are the verses in the two versions I've been using:
The historical record of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham:
Abraham fathered Isaac,
Isaac fathered Jacob,
Jacob fathered Judah and his brothers,
Judah fathered Perez and Zerah by Tamar,
Perez fathered Hezron,
Hezron fathered Aram,
Aram fathered Amminadab,
Amminadab fathered Nahshon,
Nahshon fathered Salmon,
Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab,
Boaz fathered Obed by Ruth,
Obed fathered Jesse,
and Jesse fathered King David.
Then David fathered Solomon by Uriah’s wife,
Solomon fathered Rehoboam,
Rehoboam fathered Abijah,
Abijah fathered Asa,
Asa fathered Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat fathered Joram,
Joram fathered Uzziah,
Uzziah fathered Jotham,
Jotham fathered Ahaz,
Ahaz fathered Hezekiah,
Hezekiah fathered Manasseh,
Manasseh fathered Amon,
Amon fathered Josiah,
and Josiah fathered Jechoniah and his brothers
at the time of the exile to Babylon.
Then after the exile to Babylon
Jechoniah fathered Shealtiel,
Shealtiel fathered Zerubbabel,
Zerubbabel fathered Abiud,
Abiud fathered Eliakim,
Eliakim fathered Azor,
Azor fathered Zadok,
Zadok fathered Achim,
Achim fathered Eliud,
Eliud fathered Eleazar,
Eleazar fathered Matthan,
Matthan fathered Jacob,
and Jacob fathered Joseph the husband of Mary,
who gave birth to Jesus who is called the Messiah.
So all the generations from Abraham to David were 14 generations; and from David until the exile to Babylon, 14 generations; and from the exile to Babylon until the Messiah, 14 generations. [HCSB]
The family tree of Jesus Christ, David’s son, Abraham’s son:
Abraham had Isaac,
Isaac had Jacob,
Jacob had Judah and his brothers,
Judah had Perez and Zerah (the mother was Tamar),
Perez had Hezron,
Hezron had Aram,
Aram had Amminadab,
Amminadab had Nahshon,
Nahshon had Salmon,
Salmon had Boaz (his mother was Rahab),
Boaz had Obed (Ruth was the mother),
Obed had Jesse,
Jesse had David,
and David became king.
David had Solomon (Uriah’s wife was the mother),
Solomon had Rehoboam,
Rehoboam had Abijah,
Abijah had Asa,
Asa had Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat had Joram,
Joram had Uzziah,
Uzziah had Jotham,
Jotham had Ahaz,
Ahaz had Hezekiah,
Hezekiah had Manasseh,
Manasseh had Amon,
Amon had Josiah,
Josiah had Jehoiachin and his brothers,
and then the people were taken into the Babylonian exile.
When the Babylonian exile ended,
Jeconiah had Shealtiel,
Shealtiel had Zerubbabel,
Zerubbabel had Abiud,
Abiud had Eliakim,
Eliakim had Azor,
Azor had Zadok,
Zadok had Achim,
Achim had Eliud,
Eliud had Eleazar,
Eleazar had Matthan,
Matthan had Jacob,
Jacob had Joseph, Mary’s husband,
the Mary who gave birth to Jesus,
the Jesus who was called Christ.
There were fourteen generations from Abraham to David,
another fourteen from David to the Babylonian exile,
and yet another fourteen from the Babylonian exile to Christ. [MSG]
I don't have anything new to say about this genealogy. I've heard it pointed out that the stories it contains include all sorts of sin and brokenness, and that it's a reminder that Jesus came for (as John Piper said once) us-type sinners. That He came into our sinful world to identify with sinners so that sinners could identify with Him.
I'm also reminded that the people in this list were the people who had been given promises from God, and that Jesus would ultimately fulfill each of those promises for all time. That these people were given the Law which Paul would say was designed to be a schoolmaster leading the world to Jesus. That these people were given the prophets, the "oracles of God." That the law and the prophets (and the poetry and proverbs) showed people what God was like, but none so clearly as Christ Himself did when He--God very God--took the stage and told His own story in the first person.
I have only recently begun to comprehend the significance of the fact that Christ was born under the law to fulfill the law. Some of His teaching (and how different it SEEMS from the teaching of the apostles in the rest of the NT) only makes sense when we realize that He had not put the Old Covenant away yet. In His teaching, He wasn't yet eradicating it, but illuminating it, putting the final touches on centuries of preparation for the veil to be torn...
This is the first and the last miracle of all, that God became one of us.
John 1:1-14
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. All things were created through Him, and apart from Him not one thing was created that has been created. Life was in Him, and that life was the light of men. That light shines in the darkness, yet the darkness did not overcome it. There was a man named John who was sent from God. He came as a witness to testify about the light, so that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but he came to testify about the light. The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was created through Him, yet the world did not recognize Him. He came to His own, and His own people did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, He gave them the right to be children of God, to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood, or of the will of the flesh, or of the will of man, but of God. The Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We observed His glory, the glory as the One and Only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
[HCSB]
The Word was first, the Word present to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God, in readiness for God from day one. Everything was created through him; nothing—not one thing!— came into being without him. What came into existence was Life, and the Life was Light to live by. The Life-Light blazed out of the darkness; the darkness couldn’t put it out. There once was a man, his name John, sent by God to point out the way to the Life-Light. He came to show everyone where to look, who to believe in. John was not himself the Light; he was there to show the way to the Light. The Life-Light was the real thing: Every person entering Life he brings into Light. He was in the world, the world was there through him, and yet the world didn’t even notice. He came to his own people, but they didn’t want him. But whoever did want him, who believed he was who he claimed and would do what he said, He made to be their true selves, their child-of-God selves. These are the God-begotten, not blood-begotten, not flesh-begotten, not sex-begotten. The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood. We saw the glory with our own eyes, the one-of-a-kind glory, like Father, like Son, Generous inside and out, true from start to finish.
[MSG]
What a mystery! How does the ocean fit inside a tea kettle? How can the sun inhabit the flame of a candle? How can God Himself become a man? And THEN! This miracle takes place, and we don't even recognize it! Didn't like the version of God/man He presented. We quizzed Him and challenged Him and argued with Him and accused Him of insanity and sinfulness and even being a demon. And we rejected and killed Him.
Well, not me, of course. I've accepted Him as savior. I'm one of the good guys. I would have been right there with the apostles at Pentecost. I've been in church all my life, and I know my Bible inside and out, and I... Wait, that sounds more like the Pharisees than the apostles...
I'm not saying I'm not saved, but I think there's a principle here, that Jesus is at times not what we expect Him to be, or want Him to be. The challenge of Anno Domini is to allow Him to show us WHO. HE. IS. And as we see Him for Who He is, and receive Him for Who He is, we will see His glory, and be transformed by that glory...
Jesus, blow me away, take me by surprise, rock my world...just don't let me be satisfied to put You in MY box of what I expect You to be, want You to be... let me be changed!
I have challenged our congregation at Eastern Heights to make 2014 Anno Domini in a more specific way than usual. Let this be the year we really seek to get to know Jesus better than ever before. I didn't spell out a series of steps, or a handful of "keys" to knowing Christ, or anything like that. The specifics are left up to the individual, but I hope we will be sharing our journeys with each other along the way. As part of my quest to get to know Christ better, I'll be working through a harmony of the gospels I found at blueletterbible.org.
Today's Scripture from the Gospels is Luke 1:1-4.
Many have undertaken to compile a narrative about the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as the original eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed them down to us. It also seemed good to me, since I have carefully investigated everything from the very first, to write to you in an orderly sequence, most honorable Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed. [HCSB]
So many others have tried their hand at putting together a story of the wonderful harvest of Scripture and history that took place among us, using reports handed down by the original eyewitnesses who served this Word with their very lives. Since I have investigated all the reports in close detail, starting from the story’s beginning, I decided to write it all out for you, most honorable Theophilus, so you can know beyond the shadow of a doubt the reliability of what you were taught. [MSG]
My thoughts:
Jesus Christ is real. This is no fairy story, no child's fable. The events of the Gospels really did happen. God really did become human in order to save us, and to draw us into close relationship with Him. Not only do I want to know Jesus better, but HE wants me to know Him better. In fact, beyond that, He already knows ME! He knows my weakness, my fears, my failures; and because of grace He comes not to condemn me for these things, but to lift me up out of them. He lifts me up, not to put me on a shelf, but to draw me near Him so that I may know Him, and may grow to know Him more fully. The desire to know Him better in 2014 does not come from myself, but from Him who works in us both "to will and to do." And if He desires it, and He has placed this desire in me, will He not satisfy this desire so sweetly and powerfully in this year?
