When something good happens in my life, I'm often tempted to say: I did it! or: This wouldn't have happened except for what I did... But is that really the case? I mean - can I accept all the praise for good things that happen in my life - even all the good things that I seem to cause in my life? Or should I assign everything to God? Should I say that regardless of what I had done, if God wanted it to happen, it would have happened - regardless of my action (or inaction)?
I love how Isaiah addresses this in verse 26:12 - where he writes: For indeed, all that we have done, you have done for us. In other words, it's a joint effort - us and God! We're working together!
So the way I see it, we can do nothing good on our own - without the help of God. But on the other hand, God uses people to accomplish his good purposes on the earth. Things don't just happen - people do them...
This is great news - that God loves me - and everyone else - enough to use us to do the things he wants. But it's also a challenge, because this means that God expects us to work with him, and to listen to him, and to follow his ways.
I pray that God will continue to give me the strength to follow him.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Memorial Day Prayer
Since this coming Monday is Memorial Day, I have been trying to write a Memorial Day prayer. I've probably read over a dozen prayers claiming to be for Memorial Day, but I haven't been happy with either of them. They seem to have one of two problems:
1. Some of the prayers seem to imply that the soldiers of the US are doing God's work. They tie our country and our religion a little too tight for my taste, as I believe that nothing is above the Kingdom of God - and that the US certainly doesn't embody the characteristics of God's Kingdom (just as no country currently on earth does).
2. Other prayers take the opposite tack, and are so careful not to intertwine the US and Christianity, that they forget the meaning of Memorial Day: to honor fallen soldiers. Instead, they focus on other things - sometimes not even mentioning our soldiers or our nation at all.
There has to be a middle ground somewhere. There has to be a place where we can thank God for our country, and thank God for the men and women who have defended this country, without stating that God has somehow made us better than others who live in other countries. Has God blessed us in the US? Absolutely! But I believe he has also blessed the people of other nations as well - often in different ways.
So after reading these various prayers on the Internet and in the United Methodist Book of Worship, I have come up with something that I plan to use in our church this Sunday. I'm copying it here for review and critique, if any so desire:
Righteous God,
You are the Lord and the Creator of all that is, all that was, and all that will be.
You rule over every nation,
From the United States of America
To the smallest countries of the world.
We thank you, Lord,
That you have blessed us with freedom and liberty in this country
Just as you have blessed citizens of other countries in numerous ways.
We also thank you, Lord,
For those brave men and women who have sacrificed themselves
Even to the point of death
To uphold and protect those freedoms
From people and nations which are seeking evil for us.
We trust, Lord,
That though there is a time for war,
There is also a time for peace.
Help us to live then, not as people of war,
but as people who desire and love peace
Help us to be more eager for agreement than for victory.
And help us to refrain from hate, but seek to always show your love.
For we desire to be faithful to you, and to your Son Jesus Christ,
Amen.
1. Some of the prayers seem to imply that the soldiers of the US are doing God's work. They tie our country and our religion a little too tight for my taste, as I believe that nothing is above the Kingdom of God - and that the US certainly doesn't embody the characteristics of God's Kingdom (just as no country currently on earth does).
2. Other prayers take the opposite tack, and are so careful not to intertwine the US and Christianity, that they forget the meaning of Memorial Day: to honor fallen soldiers. Instead, they focus on other things - sometimes not even mentioning our soldiers or our nation at all.
There has to be a middle ground somewhere. There has to be a place where we can thank God for our country, and thank God for the men and women who have defended this country, without stating that God has somehow made us better than others who live in other countries. Has God blessed us in the US? Absolutely! But I believe he has also blessed the people of other nations as well - often in different ways.
So after reading these various prayers on the Internet and in the United Methodist Book of Worship, I have come up with something that I plan to use in our church this Sunday. I'm copying it here for review and critique, if any so desire:
Righteous God,
You are the Lord and the Creator of all that is, all that was, and all that will be.
You rule over every nation,
From the United States of America
To the smallest countries of the world.
We thank you, Lord,
That you have blessed us with freedom and liberty in this country
Just as you have blessed citizens of other countries in numerous ways.
We also thank you, Lord,
For those brave men and women who have sacrificed themselves
Even to the point of death
To uphold and protect those freedoms
From people and nations which are seeking evil for us.
We trust, Lord,
That though there is a time for war,
There is also a time for peace.
Help us to live then, not as people of war,
but as people who desire and love peace
Help us to be more eager for agreement than for victory.
And help us to refrain from hate, but seek to always show your love.
For we desire to be faithful to you, and to your Son Jesus Christ,
Amen.
Monday, May 18, 2009
40 Days of Prayer for the United Methodist Church
A few months ago, I ran across some chattering on the Internet from some of the Young Clergy in the United Methodist church. Among other things, the idea was floated around of holding a Prayer Vigil - 40 days of prayer starting May 18th. This date was chosen to coincide with the first Annual Conference this year.
Please join us in praying faithfully for the renewal and revitalization of the United Methodist Church.
PS - I wrote the prayer for June 16th...
Please join us in praying faithfully for the renewal and revitalization of the United Methodist Church.
PS - I wrote the prayer for June 16th...
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Heap Burning Coals?
Last night in our Bible Study, we had a discussion about what Paul meant by the term "heap burning coals upon [an enemy's] head" in Romans 12:20. Obviously this is a metaphor, but what exactly does it refer to, and what does it mean? Two possibilities were offered up, one of which I'd never heard before. So I decided to look up the phrase and see what other commentaries and interpreters thought Paul was saying here.
The first thing I discovered was that Paul is borrowing the phrase (actually much of the surrounding passage) from Solomon - in Proverbs 25:21-22. So doubtless, this was referring to an ancient practice - almost 1000 years old even when Paul used the term.
The next thing I discovered is that no one agrees on what the phrase means - not entirely. Most people saw it as a good thing - or at most a bad thing which brings about good. Let me detail a few of the thoughts:
1. John Wesley (and others) believed that this referred to the practice of refining metal - that burning coals were heaped upon ore to refine them. In the same way, the "burning coals" of caring for our enemy would refine him. As Wesley put it (copying from Adam Clarke) "Heaping coals of fire upon its head: In the kind warmth the metal learns to glow, And pure from dross the silver runs below."
2. Another common understanding is that by loving our enemies, we would cause them to feel the burning pain of shame and remorse - which would lead to a change in heart. One person last night put it this way: Kill them with kindness.
3. Another interpretation that was shared last night (and that I found again this morning) relies on the belief that in ancient times, women would often seek out coals from their neighbors to light their own fires that had gone out. They would carry these coals in a clay stove upon their head. So if someone were to give them a "heaping pile" this would be a very generous act - since a person really only needs one good coal to light a fire.
There are many other interpretations of this phrase, although most are simply other takes on the first two I've shared.
Personally, I'm not sure what real-life act inspired the metaphor, whether it was the pain of being burned, refining metal, or carrying live coals on a head to start a fire. Neither Solomon nor Paul explains this. But based on the context - I would say that "heaping burning coals" is not meant to be a punishment - it's not meant to be vengeance - but a way of showing love and hopefully effecting a change in the other person.
Whatever it is - I pray that no one ever has to do it to me!
The first thing I discovered was that Paul is borrowing the phrase (actually much of the surrounding passage) from Solomon - in Proverbs 25:21-22. So doubtless, this was referring to an ancient practice - almost 1000 years old even when Paul used the term.
The next thing I discovered is that no one agrees on what the phrase means - not entirely. Most people saw it as a good thing - or at most a bad thing which brings about good. Let me detail a few of the thoughts:
1. John Wesley (and others) believed that this referred to the practice of refining metal - that burning coals were heaped upon ore to refine them. In the same way, the "burning coals" of caring for our enemy would refine him. As Wesley put it (copying from Adam Clarke) "Heaping coals of fire upon its head: In the kind warmth the metal learns to glow, And pure from dross the silver runs below."
2. Another common understanding is that by loving our enemies, we would cause them to feel the burning pain of shame and remorse - which would lead to a change in heart. One person last night put it this way: Kill them with kindness.
3. Another interpretation that was shared last night (and that I found again this morning) relies on the belief that in ancient times, women would often seek out coals from their neighbors to light their own fires that had gone out. They would carry these coals in a clay stove upon their head. So if someone were to give them a "heaping pile" this would be a very generous act - since a person really only needs one good coal to light a fire.
There are many other interpretations of this phrase, although most are simply other takes on the first two I've shared.
Personally, I'm not sure what real-life act inspired the metaphor, whether it was the pain of being burned, refining metal, or carrying live coals on a head to start a fire. Neither Solomon nor Paul explains this. But based on the context - I would say that "heaping burning coals" is not meant to be a punishment - it's not meant to be vengeance - but a way of showing love and hopefully effecting a change in the other person.
Whatever it is - I pray that no one ever has to do it to me!
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Forsaken by God?
My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?
Those words rung out from the cross as Jesus was dying. Most people, especially Christians, would recognize this. But why did he say them? Did God really forsake him? Was Jesus about ready to give up? Or was there something more going on here?
Well, as I re-read Psalm 22 this morning, I was reminded that Jesus was quoting from it. Originally, this was a psalm of David, probably written as he was fleeing from Saul or from his son Absolom. But as I read through it, I realized that all it can also be an apt description of Jesus' experience upon the cross.
Let me run through just a few of the similarities:
v1 - Jesus may have felt abandoned by God to some extent. Many people say that on the cross, the sins of the world were laid upon Jesus, and at this point, God broke the constant contact that he kept with his Son, since God cannot look upon Sin. however, others question if this was the case.
v6 - Jesus had been scorned, even by his friends, and was despised by many people, including an angry mob just a few hours before
v7-8 - Jesus was mocked by the soldiers, by the others being crucified with him, and by the crowd. They taunted him, saying: Have angels bring you down from the cross!
v14 - "poured out like water" - the spear that pierced Jesus brought forth blood and water - and blood was pouring from other places as well.
v14 - "bones out of joint" - Jesus would have certainly experienced this
v15 - "mouth is dry" - another common experience for victims of crucifixion
I could go on - but I think these examples will suffice. So obviously, this Psalm could be applied to Jesus in what he was experiencing upon the cross.
So the question then becomes: Did Jesus intend for his hearers to think of the Psalm - or did he really just want to use the first verse? In my opinion, he wanted the whole thing - all the negatives - as well as all the good things. You see - this was just a song of desperation - there was hope: a faith in God, a certainty of salvation, even promises at the end that God will reign forever.
So if that's the case, then Jesus' exclamation wasn't simply a cry of desperation, and it certainly wasn't a hopeless plea. You see, Jesus knew that his death would serve a purpose, just as David knew that his problems would serve a purpose as well.
I my opinion, this Psalm is a study in contrasts - a dialogue in the writer's mind between what he is experiencing, and what he knows to be true. On the one hand, enemies were encroaching, and in Jesus' case, even seemed to win (for 3 days). But despite the evil being done, the Psalmist (and Jesus) knew that God would triumph at the end, that the suffering would not be in vain.
This is the gospel - that Jesus' suffering on the cross was not in vain - but for the purpose of salvation. And our hope is that the suffering in our life will also not be in vain - but somehow used to bring the Kingdom of God upon the earth.
Those words rung out from the cross as Jesus was dying. Most people, especially Christians, would recognize this. But why did he say them? Did God really forsake him? Was Jesus about ready to give up? Or was there something more going on here?
Well, as I re-read Psalm 22 this morning, I was reminded that Jesus was quoting from it. Originally, this was a psalm of David, probably written as he was fleeing from Saul or from his son Absolom. But as I read through it, I realized that all it can also be an apt description of Jesus' experience upon the cross.
Let me run through just a few of the similarities:
v1 - Jesus may have felt abandoned by God to some extent. Many people say that on the cross, the sins of the world were laid upon Jesus, and at this point, God broke the constant contact that he kept with his Son, since God cannot look upon Sin. however, others question if this was the case.
v6 - Jesus had been scorned, even by his friends, and was despised by many people, including an angry mob just a few hours before
v7-8 - Jesus was mocked by the soldiers, by the others being crucified with him, and by the crowd. They taunted him, saying: Have angels bring you down from the cross!
v14 - "poured out like water" - the spear that pierced Jesus brought forth blood and water - and blood was pouring from other places as well.
v14 - "bones out of joint" - Jesus would have certainly experienced this
v15 - "mouth is dry" - another common experience for victims of crucifixion
I could go on - but I think these examples will suffice. So obviously, this Psalm could be applied to Jesus in what he was experiencing upon the cross.
So the question then becomes: Did Jesus intend for his hearers to think of the Psalm - or did he really just want to use the first verse? In my opinion, he wanted the whole thing - all the negatives - as well as all the good things. You see - this was just a song of desperation - there was hope: a faith in God, a certainty of salvation, even promises at the end that God will reign forever.
So if that's the case, then Jesus' exclamation wasn't simply a cry of desperation, and it certainly wasn't a hopeless plea. You see, Jesus knew that his death would serve a purpose, just as David knew that his problems would serve a purpose as well.
I my opinion, this Psalm is a study in contrasts - a dialogue in the writer's mind between what he is experiencing, and what he knows to be true. On the one hand, enemies were encroaching, and in Jesus' case, even seemed to win (for 3 days). But despite the evil being done, the Psalmist (and Jesus) knew that God would triumph at the end, that the suffering would not be in vain.
This is the gospel - that Jesus' suffering on the cross was not in vain - but for the purpose of salvation. And our hope is that the suffering in our life will also not be in vain - but somehow used to bring the Kingdom of God upon the earth.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
What a Way to Start!
When I took Speech classes in college, I was told that your opening statements are very important. Among other things, you want to make them interesting - to catch people's attention - but not too heavy - as people generally aren't ready to listen to you just yet. And when you are speaking in front of an unfamiliar audience, a quick introduction and a thanks for the invitation is usually helpful. I must admit that I don't always get it right, but I do at least try.
Peter, on the other hand, either never recieved this teaching - or just completely disregarded it. Take his opening statements in Acts 10 to those who had gathered at Cornelius' house to hear him speak: In verse 28 and 29, he says: "You yourselves know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with or to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean. So when I was sent for, I came without objection."
What an opening line! He basically started off by saying: I don't want to be here. It goes against the entire fiber of my being. You are Gentiles - You are unclean - and so my upbringing tells me that I am sinning to even be in this house. Yet since God told me to come, I am here...
How do you think the people were feeling at this point? Insulted? Put-down? Maybe... That was my initial thought - that I couldn't believe Peter was saying something like that - in front of everyone - that God had directly sent him to. But then I got to thinking about it a little more...
This was probably a very awkward time for Peter. He had never been in a Gentile's house before - and didn't really know how to act. But he knew that God had called him there. So instead of beating around the bush - and acting like everything was fine and dandy - he decided to clear the air - and let people know what was going on in his head. He told them the truth - he told them that God was working on his views of clean and unclean - and even though he didn't know where it would lead - he was willing to follow the Spirit.
A few verses later, we read that while Peter was speaking to them about Jesus, the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles - which amazed Peter's Jewish friends. But I have to wonder - if Peter had not admitted his feelings at the beginning - would the Holy Spirit have been able to use him so mightily? If Peter had not broached the subject, but had allowed himself, his friends, and his audience to dwell on the thought that Peter was breaking the law - or that what he was doing may have been a sin - then I think the Holy Spirit would have had a harder time breaking through.
But Peter was faithful - in a brash, bold, sort of way - and the Lord did incredible things through him that day. And a few chapters later, we find Peter speaking up for Paul's missionary work to the Gentiles at the Jerusalem Council - which officially opened the door for anyone to become a Christian without ever becoming a Jew (which is good news for each of us).
Peter, on the other hand, either never recieved this teaching - or just completely disregarded it. Take his opening statements in Acts 10 to those who had gathered at Cornelius' house to hear him speak: In verse 28 and 29, he says: "You yourselves know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with or to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean. So when I was sent for, I came without objection."
What an opening line! He basically started off by saying: I don't want to be here. It goes against the entire fiber of my being. You are Gentiles - You are unclean - and so my upbringing tells me that I am sinning to even be in this house. Yet since God told me to come, I am here...
How do you think the people were feeling at this point? Insulted? Put-down? Maybe... That was my initial thought - that I couldn't believe Peter was saying something like that - in front of everyone - that God had directly sent him to. But then I got to thinking about it a little more...
This was probably a very awkward time for Peter. He had never been in a Gentile's house before - and didn't really know how to act. But he knew that God had called him there. So instead of beating around the bush - and acting like everything was fine and dandy - he decided to clear the air - and let people know what was going on in his head. He told them the truth - he told them that God was working on his views of clean and unclean - and even though he didn't know where it would lead - he was willing to follow the Spirit.
A few verses later, we read that while Peter was speaking to them about Jesus, the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles - which amazed Peter's Jewish friends. But I have to wonder - if Peter had not admitted his feelings at the beginning - would the Holy Spirit have been able to use him so mightily? If Peter had not broached the subject, but had allowed himself, his friends, and his audience to dwell on the thought that Peter was breaking the law - or that what he was doing may have been a sin - then I think the Holy Spirit would have had a harder time breaking through.
But Peter was faithful - in a brash, bold, sort of way - and the Lord did incredible things through him that day. And a few chapters later, we find Peter speaking up for Paul's missionary work to the Gentiles at the Jerusalem Council - which officially opened the door for anyone to become a Christian without ever becoming a Jew (which is good news for each of us).
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Correction to a Sermon
I really hate to make mistakes. Even more than that - I hate to admit that I made a mistake. But a few weeks ago, in a sermon on the reforms of King Josiah, I said something that I have since realized was false. I said that when the King was delivered the Book of the Law - that it had likely been missing for hundreds of years - possibly since the day Solomon consecrated the Temple - or even before. I based this on the fact that there is no mention of a Book or a writing or anything like that from Judges 8 to 2 Kings 22.
However, as I have been reading through 1 and 2 Chronicles, I have realized that the book of the Law is present at times, such as 2 Chronicles 17:9, when the priests were sent out by Jehoshaphat to teach the people with the Book of the Law. There are also many other references to the Law in 1 and 2 Chronicles, although it is difficult to determine if it refers to a written law - or to an oral tradition.
That being said, it was still an incredible discovery in Josiah's time - and judging by the way he acted - it had most certainly been lost for some time (although maybe just a generation or two).
Please forgive me for not doing enough research into that statement. My desire is to be truthful in everything I say in worship.
However, as I have been reading through 1 and 2 Chronicles, I have realized that the book of the Law is present at times, such as 2 Chronicles 17:9, when the priests were sent out by Jehoshaphat to teach the people with the Book of the Law. There are also many other references to the Law in 1 and 2 Chronicles, although it is difficult to determine if it refers to a written law - or to an oral tradition.
That being said, it was still an incredible discovery in Josiah's time - and judging by the way he acted - it had most certainly been lost for some time (although maybe just a generation or two).
Please forgive me for not doing enough research into that statement. My desire is to be truthful in everything I say in worship.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)