Why You, Son-of-an-Amalekite!

The young man who told him said, "By chance I happened to be on Mount Gilboa, and behold, Saul was leaning on his spear. And behold, the chariots and the horsemen pursued him closely.  When he looked behind him, he saw me and called to me. And I said, 'Here I am. '  He said to me, 'Who are you? ' And I answered him, ' I am an Amalekite. '  Then he said to me, 'Please stand beside me and kill me, for agony has seized me because my life still lingers in me. '  So I stood beside him and killed him, because I knew that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown which was on his head and the bracelet which was on his arm, and I have brought them here to my lord." (2 Samuel 1:6-10 NASB)

David said to the young man who told him, "Where are you from?" And he answered, " I am the son of an alien, an Amalekite." (2 Samuel 1: 13 NASB)

The setting put forth right in the first verse is that David has returned from the  'slaughter of the Amalekites', and been in his city for 2 days.  To recap, the Amalekites had razed Ziklag on a raid into Southern Judah while David was marshalling with the Philistines to go fight Israel.  He returned home to ashes.  He then spent a night and all the next day attacking those who had burned his city.  As it turns out, the reason he had this problem with the Amalekites was because Saul failed to do his job by killing their king, Agag.  Samuel killed the king, but many of the people and stuff had escaped.  Saul settled for less than complete obedience, and this contributed to his rejection by God.  The Amalekites form this social/ethnic backdrop to Saul's rejection (and eventual death) and David's election by God.

So, David returns from slaughtering Amalekite raiders only to find one a few days later telling him that he had killed Saul.  It's not a good day to be an Amalekite anywhere near David right now.  So, why is this?  What is it about the Amalekites that makes them the enemies of God, and ones He wants to destroy from the earth?  Okay, here's the condensed version:

Amalek is the grandson of Esau and his people are nomads in the region between Canaan and Egypt (Genesis 36:12, 16).  As the people of Israel venture out into the desert, the people of Amalek attack them, and are defeated by Joshua while Moses' arms are held by Aaron and Hur (Exodus 17).  As a result, God promises to 'utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven' (Exodus 17 and Deuteronomy 25:17-19).  Amalek remains a problem through time of the Judges (Judges 3 and 5), and finally, with Samuel, God commands Saul to fulfill God's curse on Amalek (1 Samuel 15) which he fails to do.  Now, the Amalekites continue to be a problem for David.

It seems that, from God's perspective, Amalek continues a form of apathetic rejection of God begun in Esau.  It's not that they are particularly evil, any more than anyone else is evil.  It's not that they raid more, worship more idols, or practice some other behavior that makes them stand out, with one exception:  They consistently attack the people God has chosen.  Others do this occasionally.  For some it varies with who happens to be king.  Edom (Esau) go in and out of favor.  Moab goes in and out of favor, even Egypt garners praise or favorable treatment from God at times.  But not Amalek.  Ishmaelites, yes.  Amalekites, no.

So, what's the point here?  Where's the point of application for me? I think one point that I need to accept is that some people have actually been rejected by God.  Whether because He knows they will never repent or because they have entered into that unforgivable state of calling the things of God the things of Satan, I don't know.  I just see that God rejects people.  I think perhaps the grace of God is demonstrated in that He doesn't reject everyone.

In fact, as I read Scripture, it looks like He truly rejects only a very select few.  Besides the Amalekites, the only people of whom I remember God requiring the complete destruction is the Canaanites.  It's instructive to me that in both cases this sentence/command wasn't carried out.  And the people of God suffered in both cases.  God rejects, and asks that His people think as He does, and address people as He does, and treat people as He does.  So, as rare as rejection is, when God makes it clear that He rejects someone, so should I.  They may be popular, it may not 'feel right', and it may not be easy to explain, but it becomes a matter of obedience.

Fortunately, in my community, I don't know of any particular rejected people group.  For that I'm very thankful, but that doesn't mean there aren't some here.  My fear is that I will know what to do when I meet them, but not have the courage to be obedient.  On the other hand, I can't avoid putting myself into the community to avoid meeting such people.  And this category of people whom my Master rejects aren't those who irritate me, I don't like, or who seem senseless and rude to me.  It's never my estimation or my ability to evaluate people, but always my Master's.  And since I'm commanded to love my enemies, it's not that my Master calls me to 'hate' them, but rather to join His perspective of rejection.  I'm not even sure what that would look like.

So, I'm sure I don't know what I would have to do with people I don't know whom my Master may have rejected for reasons I can't see.  Right.  And with that, I say, 'Good day to you'.

Stubborn Student, Stubborn Teacher

Now the Philistines took the ark of God and brought it from Ebenezer to Ashdod.  Then the Philistines took the ark of God and brought it to the house of Dagon and set it by Dagon.  When the Ashdodites arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the LORD. So they took Dagon and set him in his place again.  But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the LORD. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.  Therefore neither the priests of Dagon nor all who enter Dagon's house tread on the threshold of Dagon in Ashdod to this day. (1 Samuel 5:1-5 NASB)

Being stubborn is sometimes an admirable trait.  Sometimes being stubborn is indomitable,  sometimes abominable; it all depends on what isn't being given up.  Chapter's 5 and 6 in 1 Samuel depict a stubborn people, victorious in battle, but losers on the religious front - and stubborn losers at that.

From the inside looking out, the Philistines just seem silly.  They hold onto their belief in Dagon even though he winds up face down before the captured box of Israel.  They believe this box represents the God worshiped in Israel, and they see what happens to their idol when in the presence of the box, but still persist in worshiping an inferior god.  Why is that?  It seems silly, at least from the inside of the people of God looking out and those on the outside.

From the outside, when the culture and cultures around the Philistines are honestly considered, it makes a bit more sense.  The gods of nations holding to "pantheons" of gods aren't burdened with certain assumptions about their gods.  First off, they don't assume gods are "all-powerful" or omnipotent.  This is partly because there are many gods and a hierarchy among their ranks.  Then there is also the belief that certain gods are responsible for various things in the world, and they use those things against each other occasionally.  They fight amongst each other.  They lie, cheat, steal, and are like people in many ways, just really powerful ones.

So, in that context, being "wrong" only means for that moment.  Dagon beat this Israelite god in battle, otherwise they wouldn't have the box, right?  So Dagon being face down twice isn't an indicator that there is One God, or that this God is more powerful than the others necessarily, at least not for them.  It may mean that this foreign god was able to get the best of their local deity a few times; "the best out of three falls and all that."  It could mean several things that didn't necessitate belief that Dagon wasn't real or that he wasn't powerful enough to be worshiped, or that the Philistines should abandon their ways and gods and join Israel (the people couldn't even win a battle with their god among them - why join them?).

Sometimes, I'm a slow learner.  I keep banging my head against a wall, confused by my headache.  Why isn't what I'm doing working?  Perhaps I should just keep at it.  On the flip side, persistence in obedience to my Master seems so...difficult.  When I don't see the results I want, I use the pragmatic American philosophy and try something else that "works".  Why is it so easy to be stubborn with the wrong things, and hard to be stubborn with the right things?

But this account of the Philistines and the gold box of Israel continues.  Plagues are inflicted on the city holding the Ark of the Covenant.  Then they move it because, "...His hand is severe on us and on Dagon our god."  The next town suffers the same, and the third, and so on.  For seven months they continue to move and the plagues move with the box.  Finally they decide to give it back to Israel.  This God of Israel is persistent, even with students who persistently don't get it.

I believe that my Master was working with the Philistines to get their attention and lead them to Himself.  I believe He did that with the Egyptians as the Israelites tried to leave with Moses.  I believe that He does that repeatedly throughout Scripture with foreign peoples.  And He doesn't give up either.  There are lots of examples of God using Israel to reach Philistines, Edomites, Amonites, Syrians, Phoenicians, even Babylonians and Persians.  His work with foreign powers is fairly consistent.  So why this persistence?

Again, I believe that these are examples in the Hebrew Scriptures of my Master's grace toward other peoples besides Israel.  They weren't chosen, but they were shown grace.  There is a desire on the part of my Master to relate to these peoples.  In some cases the Chosen People were a hindrance, in others they were the messengers; much like church today.  The grace of my Master hasn't diminished, and while culminated in Jesus and His death, burial, and resurrection, it didn't start there; and it doesn't end there either.  One day, examples these peoples whom my Master has tried to reach for thousands of years will stand before Him together with His chosen people.

So the question is two-fold.  Am I willing to learn from my Master?  And am I willing to be a messenger rather than a hindrance?  It's amazing how closely linked those two are.  It helps to have the first one answered before working on the second part.  So, back to school for me, as I apprentice to the Maker of Stars and Tracer of quarks.  Hmmm, where's my slide rule?

Can Lost Reverence Be Found?

Her rival, however, would provoke her bitterly to irritate her, because the LORD had closed her womb.  It happened year after year, as often as she went up to the house of the LORD, she would provoke her; so she wept and would not eat.  Then Elkanah her husband said to her, "Hannah, why do you weep and why do you not eat and why is your heart sad? Am I not better to you than ten sons?"  Then Hannah rose after eating and drinking in Shiloh. Now Eli the priest was sitting on the seat by the doorpost of the temple of the LORD.  She, greatly distressed, prayed to the LORD and wept bitterly.  She made a vow and said, "O LORD of hosts, if You will indeed look on the affliction of Your maidservant and remember me, and not forget Your maidservant, but will give Your maidservant a son, then I will give him to the LORD all the days of his life, and a razor shall never come on his head."  (1 Samuel 1:6-11 NASB)

In my youth, I was taught reverence for the One my family worshiped.  It was taught in a thousand different ways, but I still remember it.  We spoke only in whispers in the sanctuary (and called it that).  We wore our best to church, better than we dressed anywhere else; not to impress others but to bring our best to our God.  We didn't miss church.  This tended to spread communicable diseases among the faithful church-goers, but we shared so much anyway, it didn't matter.

There were just things you did.  And there were just things you didn't do.  You did not question a leader, at least not as a child.  But we also did not direct our anger at God.  Ironically, it was understood that, as Master of all things, ultimately whatever bad thing happened to me was His fault.  Yet we were never to blame Him, at least out loud; or so it seemed.  The lesson being taught is actually one that is struggling to emerge again in modern congregations.  The lesson was that nothing bad that happens smudges the goodness and glory of my Master.

This lesson, lost in the rebellion against "organized religion", is one that needs to be renewed.  It's one among many, but it is one for which we pay dearly.  The loss of this lesson has permitted our society to dictate belief and practice to us in the place of Scripture.  This is evident in our disdain for authority.  When we teach that the Scriptural Deity can be yelled at and resented, and He's big enough to handle it, we degrade His holy goodness and glory.  We bring the One we cannot reach into our realm, and make Him one of us.

Jesus became one of us by His choice.  Our Maker reaches out to us.  He is unapproachable, unreachable, incomprehensible, and unknown by our own devices.  We can't reason Him into existence, we can't reliably demonstrate in controlled experiments one element of His character.  The best we can hope to achieve to to look at His handiwork and marvel at such magnificence and power.  Once there, we can then, with awe, approach the Scriptures; His record of His self-revelation to His human creatures.  And from there we can make ourselves available to His Spirit.  That is the best we can do.  Most of us don't even do that.

I believe that when I consider myself free to resent and be angry toward my Master, I deny the very first line of His Scripture, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."  If He created it all, what right do I have to resent Him for anything?  That I know of His existence means He has revealed Himself to me.  The blessings I receive from Him could stop right there, and I still have more than I deserve and more of His attention than I warrant.  That He does not stop there multiplies shocking grace until I reach the cross where all my assumptions, presumptions, pride, reasoning, and self-righteousness fail, revealed as the refuse heap they are.  And destroyed as a modern American male, I stand before an empty tomb, myself empty of all that I call my own, where I crumple to the ground in worship.

The truth lost with the lesson of reverence is that my Master has assaulted and utterly destroyed the limits of my imagination, understanding, and comprehension so that I sometimes can't, or won't, see Him as He has revealed Himself.  Like He hid Moses in a rock so he would not die as he saw only a part of His glory, so I am only able to see a part of my Master.  But the part I see is so much more than anything I endure.  How can I resent the One having done so much for me?  How can Jesus, the cross and the empty tomb not be enough?  How is that possible?  Scripture is already more of a gracious gift than I can ever be worthy.  How can the message it contains not reduce the rest of me to mere heap of gratitude, gratitude I can never really express well enough?

Preaching in Sin-City

After these things he left Athens and went to Corinth. (Acts 18:1 NASB)

This seemingly innocent verse hides a few mysteries.  The verse begins a new chapter, and for many of us, that forms all break we need.  But the preceding events took place in Athens, where Paul was waiting for Silas and Timothy.  Later on in 18 we learn that they find him in Corinth.  Why leave Athens?  There was no riot, no plot to kill Paul, nothing mentioned by Luke suggests a reason.  Not that there has to be one, it's just contrary to the initial purpose of being there in the first place.

Of course, while waiting in Athens, Paul was ministering, arguing in the market, and even spoke to the assembly on the Aeropagus.  He had been busy, yet didn't draw the ire of the people as he did in other cities, or at least it wasn't mentioned by Luke.  Yet he leaves for Corinth.  There was either something in Athens to be left behind or something in Corinth that drew him.  Athens, the ancient city of Greek culture, was at least well ruled and calm.  It wasn't a Roman colony but was thoroughly Greek.  The Jews there seemed unconcerned about what Paul was preaching, and no multitude of them is even mentioned, either for or against him.

But Corinth is a unique port city.  It too is ancient, but its location in Achia made it very unique.  In those days of dangerous nautical travel, it formed an overland option which made moving merchandise safer; the path around the peninsula could be avoided by moving it a short distance over the narrow "neck" where Corinth sat.  It was unique in that it had two ports, one on the Adriatic, and one on the Ionian Seas.  Between these two sat Corinth.  Corinth had been an ancient city, but then destroyed in one war and then another, and then totally rebuilt as a Roman Colony (here we go again).

But as the wealth of the city grew from the trade traffic, so did the vice and avarice.  Wealth bred excess, and excess bred a lowering of values and virtues.  The city was known in Paul's day as hedonistic and vicious.  So, why go here instead of steady stately Athens?  Paul says in Romans that where sin abounds, so grace abounds all the more (Romans 5:20), not to say sin was a good way to gain more grace, but to say that grace always triumphs over sin.  But, on the other hand, where sin was plentiful could be found a good place for grace to also be plentiful.  Perhaps Paul saw Corinth as an opportunity.

What about my place?  I live where many people do not go to church, or if they do, to a church of a "different gospel", other than that of the Scriptures.  In this small place can be found drug trafficking, human trafficking, suicides, home invasions, and corruption in government.  And rather than being wealthy, this place is considered economically depressed; so we have all the vice with twice the hopelessness.  If sin can abound in such profuseness, then can't grace increase to an absurd degree?  Why not?

But as Corinth had issues after the grace abounded (required two letters from Paul, and is doubtful even that fixed it), so issues will be the result as well.  Paul spent 18 months in the city just to get it grounded, and even then it suffered from internal conflict and personality squabbles.  It's not that grace solves all problems, it that it ushers in an age of change.  It doesn't complete the work of becoming holy in one fell swoop (like we wish it would), it begins the process of struggling out of the chrysolis.  Without the struggle, our wings of faith and total reliance on our Master don't form correctly.  Unlike the butterfly, we do need help; we need to struggle, but we also need help through it together.

So I imagine that in this place, there will be and is now a dire need for growth in faith and grounding in Scriptures.  Something I was raised in, but which is missing here because it was never a part of life as it was for me.  I have the stories people here are missing.  I have a treasure that isn't mine to hoard, but must be spread all over to everyone who shares my faith.  I am a storyteller, so I have stories to tell.  Only mine don't start with "Once upon a time..."  They mostly begin with, "And it happened..."  It might help to work on my "Jewish" accent so I can tell the stories with the proper sounding perspective, as they are mostly stories of Jews.

A World Chaning Lesson

When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." (Acts 11:18 NASB)

This verse is the beginning of an enormous paradigm shift for the Jewish believers in Jerusalem.  The survival of Jews everywhere in the Roman Empire was made possible by the Roman law exempting them from required worship of the gods (it was considered atheism - ironic isn't it?).  This law was one of the things that made it possible for Jews to pursue holiness among Gentiles, which is obviously important in any relationship with God.  The pursuit of this holiness among Gentiles in the first century focused on two things primarily, circumcision and keeping the Sabbath.  Jesus took issue with this pursuit this way lots of times

Essentially, the Jews had defined holiness by being Jew, not by their behavior so to speak.  In other words, someone could be a cheat, liar, mean spirited, and cruel, but as long as they were a Jew, kept the Sabbath, and had been circumcised, they were still holy.  The Jews acceptability before God had been subjugated under their distinction from Gentiles.  They figured if they had the one, they automatically had the other.  Jesus said different and really upset people (and by "people" I mean religious leaders).  This is the cultural context in which comes the realization that "God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." 

So what's a Gentile believer to do?  They aren't a Jew, so they are exempt from the atheism law.  Any guild through which they would gain employment had a patron god/goddess worshiped as part of their practices, so how could they keep their jobs?  They would quickly become illegal and unemployed in their Gentile culture.  How does a Gentile hold Jesus as Lord, believing in His resurrection from the dead, and get along in life?  It gets complicated very quickly.

A great number of Gentiles "liked" the Jewish faith in Yahweh, yet found it unreasonable to convert to Judaism (I mean, there was surgery involved - seriously, who wants that?).  So they attended the Jewish Synagogues.  They couldn't participate in what went on, but they could hear the Law and pray.  Cornelius was such a Gentile.  But not all the Gentiles who received the good news of Jesus were "God-fearing Gentiles".  The Philippian Jailer for instance did not have a Synagogue to attend even if he were a God-fearing Gentile.  There was still a cultural barrier for Gentiles that had enormous ramifications for them.

So, later on, when Jews "of the Circumcision" show up in Antioch later, even Peter and Barnabas find they are not immune to their peer pressure to disassociate with Gentiles.  These teachers Paul found so dangerous he wished they would "mutilate" themselves rather than teach the requirement of circumcision to please God (Galatians 5:12).  Paul makes some very bold statements to the believers struggling with whether or not to become Jews as well as Christians.  He tells them that if they do, they essentially loose their salvation in Jesus (Galatians 5:2-4).

So the "paradigm shift" in Acts 11:18 either did not last long, or was not passed on to others who later joined "the circumcision".  This is the lesson and warning I gain from this passage.  Sure I need to be careful not to seek acceptance to my Master by what I do.  That is clear.  But what may be missed is that this lesson must be passed on.  It's not enough to expect other believers to "catch" the lesson as we "fellowship".  For the benefit of the church, the benefit to newer believers, and the glory of my Master, this lesson must be passed on.

Here's what I mean, any casual observer of Christian behavior can easily assume that we seek to be "holy" in our behavior so that we can be acceptable to God.  When in reality, we seek to be holy in our behavior in response to our Master's acceptance.  That may sound like a semantic differentiation to make, but it's actually huge.  The very understanding of salvation, and therefore a relationship with the Maker of the universe hangs on this distinction.  Any assumption that human creatures can do anything to be acceptable to the Maker of stars and quarks is a failure of faith and will not save that creature.  We must pass on the truth of "unconditional election" of any relationship with our Master.  He elects (chooses) us, we respond to that divine choice.  That's it.  There can be nothing else.

Think about it, we are saved by grace, through faith, and even that is a gift of God!  How can there be any action on our part that somehow entitles us to a relationship with the Master of all matter?  What could we possibly do that could get His attention?  Do we seriously expect that we can somehow be "good enough" that He will stop forming a star in some corner of the universe and pay attention to us?  What hope can we have to somehow impress One who forms quarks out of nothing, then organizes them into atoms, arranges those into molecules, and connects those molecules into a pattern that lives and breathes?  Seriously, what are we going to do to impress such a Person?  Go ahead, ride your unicycle, trim an appendage of your body, refrain from eating certain things, whatever.  It won't work.  He will still say He never knew you.

The lesson is that we have nothing with which to "pay" for our salvation, nothing to bargain with for a relationship with God.  The joy of the lesson is that we don't need anything either.  Consider this, the Maker of stars and quarks wants to have this relationship with me.  I don't have to earn it.  I'm so busy trying to get his attention that I miss the joy of the attention I already have.  Pity me!  But remember that it is my selfish heart, my self-focused "paradigm" that drives me to this "performance" mentality.  I have to accept the humiliation of my condition before my Master in order to then receive the glorification of His transformation of me.  I am the wonder (whatever wonder) that I am only because of the grace and mercy of my Master.  I didn't work for it, He gave it to me.  The wonder that I am (the only wonder that I am) is the wonder of my Master; the Wonder of His grace in accepting one such as me, the Wonder of His mercy in pursuing me when I ran from Him, the Wonder of His power in transforming me to make me fit for His heaven.

So, now, the life I now live in the body I live by faith in the One who loves me and has given Himself up for me.  But I can only live such a life if I have been and continue to be crucified with Jesus, and I no longer live.  It's is a resurrected life that my Master wants for me.  So, here I go, it's time for this "zombie" to obey my Master.

Dying For More Stuff

But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property,  and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife's full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles' feet.  But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land?  While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."  And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it. (Acts 5:1-5 NASB)

First off, yesterday and last night went better than yesterday.  The struggles were still there, but they were shorter, and I slept a lot better.  It was still insanely busy yesterday, but I was able to get mostly caught up at work.

 Now about this passage, one typically familiar to believers, but still very odd for all that.  The setting is the newly formed church in Jerusalem, bustling with far more people than they have resources to help.  Many members, including Barnabas, sell property and bring the proceeds to be used by the apostles to meet the needs.  Enter Ananias and his wife Sapphira.  They also sell a property (literally a field), and the word used for "kept back" has the range of meaning of being deceptive or secretive about it.  The word can also mean embezzle.

But even so, the property is theirs, the proceeds are theirs, which Peter points out.  Is there a requirement that they bring the whole thing?  Is it a rule in the congregation?  This is where the previous statements about "everyone had all things in common" is shown to be a general overview rather than a particular statement about everyone without exception.  And that makes sense.  It's still the way it is today.  To answer the previous questions; no, no rule is mentioned that all must have all things in common.  The problem facing this couple was the temptation to "appear" as if they too had all things in common with everyone else.  They wanted the recognition as being one of those (like Barnabas, everyone wants to be like Barnabas) without actually being like them.

So what if Ananias and his wife kept some of the proceeds back to pay for a new dishwasher, or to do some needed repairs to the parapet around the roof, but told Peter, "This is part of the proceeds, because we are using some for household needs"?  What would have happened then?  Would the Holy Spirit informed them through Peter that it's all or nothing, and killed them anyway?  I suspect not, but truly it's an argument from silence; that's not what happened.  Whatever their purpose, they didn't want others to regard them as the ones who almost gave generously to the poor.  They wanted to appear more than they were.

But there is an important element in what they did that causes their death, and it wasn't the use they had for the money, nor was it their desire to appear other than they were (we'd all be dead if it were just that).  Peter specifically accuses Ananias of lying to the Holy Spirit.  What I gather from this accusation is that these two people really either denied the power of the Holy Spirit or the Sovereignty of the Holy Spirit.  Actually, there are several other possibilities too as I think about it.  The underlying connection to them has to be a degradation of the Spirit of God within them to the point where He has no influence.  I would well imagine fear gripping all who hear of it.  How much danger am I in if that's the case?

In a sense, this couple thought they could get away with the deception even though they had seen evidence of the Holy Spirit working around them.  They denied His power and sovereignty over them.  Either He wouldn't know what they did, or He couldn't do anything about it if He did know.  This is what endangered their lives?  How often have I, with full knowledge that the choices before me include some clearly contrary to my Master, have still chosen the rebellious thing?  How often have I told myself that no one will know?  How is that possible if the Holy Spirit knows?  What does it say about me if, knowing and claiming to believe that, I do it anyway?  I have to wonder, why am I still alive?

Whatever the reason I still draw breath when I have acted as these two have, I'm not sure I'd either understand it if I knew, or whether or not it would benefit me if I knew.  I don't know.  But I am more aware of the grace with which my Master covers me.  I often wish it were a covering much like swaddling clothes where my arms would be pinned to my sides.  That would keep me out of trouble.  But it's not like that.  I have free reign to make those rebellious decisions.  And I exercise that freedom way too often.

Now is probably a really good time for me to exercise another freedom I have and go before my Master in prayer, thanking Him for letting me live.  I can see from this passage that I haven't earned that right, and yet I draw yet another breath.  That is grace.  Now, for gratitude.  May that permeate my day today.

Genesis 20: Why Here, Why Now?

Now Abraham journeyed from there toward the land of the Negev, and settled between Kadesh and Shur; then he sojourned in Gerar.  Abraham said of Sarah his wife, "She is my sister." So Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. (Genesis 20:1-2 NASB)

Abraham said, "Because I thought, surely there is no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.  Besides, she actually is my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife; 13 and it came about, when God caused me to wander from my father's house, that I said to her, 'This is the kindness which you will show to me: everywhere we go, say of me, "He is my brother."'" (Genesis 20:11-13 NASB)

This chapter in Genesis seems odd for a lot of reasons, only one of which is that Sarah is now 90.  It may be difficult to imagine a 90-year-old winning a beauty contest in our day, but perhaps, longer lifespans of that age would make it plausible.  She lives long enough after this to raise a son, so perhaps at this point she can win one.  But that's just one oddity.

Another odd piece is the placement.  Either this happens a lot or Sarah really can't win a beauty pageant.  Abraham and Sarah have used this ploy ever since they have been in Canaan.  It makes it seem as if everywhere they go, this is how they introduce themselves, as brother and sister.  This is one of the reasons it's difficult for me to believe that this is a response to fear or lack of faith.  If it is, it one that God seems to permit.

The position of this account is sandwiched between Sarah being revealed as the mother of Isaac and the birth of Isaac.  So, I have wondered whether or not this account really ocurred at some other time in the lives of Abraham and Sarah.  It's placement here creates some tension in the story of Abraham because there is suddenly the danger that Isaac would not be Abraham's son, or at least that it wouldn't look that way.  That Abraham would continue this ploy after the assurance that Sarah would bear Isaac also seems strange.

So, as I examine this passage, I am left with two possibilities that fit the character of both Abraham and God.  Either the passage is in the wrong place but placed here for narrative tension, or Abraham really isn't "scared" at all, rather he is shrewd.  In this account, as in Genesis 12, he is handsomely rewarded.  He comes out on the other end of it with more than he started with.  And God backs him up in this.  It seems oddly out of character for both Abraham and God, regardless of placement.

The character of both God and Abraham are where I find my application.  Abraham is not a "perfect" prophet, or at least not perfect in his assurance that God will protect him without his deception.  God is perfectly willing to protect his weak chosen one.  He has a specific plan and will even support the deception of his prophet to make it happen.  And God is perfectly willing to raise up a chosen people from one with such character.  I see in this relationship room for me to have this sort of walk with my Master.

In Abraham, I see someone who I can measure up to.  I see that God is willing to work with my strange lapses into weakness.  I see that I can't really mess up God's plan, at least not in specifics.  I see that God will choose to work with me regardless of gaps in my character.

So if the key is not "perfectly complete" faith, what is it?  What is the key to such a relationship with the Master of the universe, Creator of all matter?  From this passage the key seems to be the Master.  Even with the king, Abimelech, the key is the Master.  It's not me, my character, or my ability to meet a standard that continues the relationship with my Master, it is my Master who continues the relationship with me. 

The grace of my Master, once having initiated my relationship with Him, now is the mechanism sustaining that relationship.  The love of the One forming stars fashions a link with me that I cannot really control or break.  Perhaps it's the irresistable grace of Calvinists, but I think of it more in terms of an irresistable desire of an irresistable God.  It's not that I want Him or that I have "gotten His attention."  It is that He has regarded me for His own reasons. 

I believe that I responded and that this response of mine is crucial; like the obedience of Abraham in leaving Haran.  But that He has regard for me is not because of something I have done.  Whatever potential He sees in me, He put there in the first place.  It was never a potential "created" or "imagined" by me.  Again, and again, my prayers have to begin with, "You love me, You have my back, and I am at Your service."  For me in my walk with my Master, that is what it is about.

What Do You Feed the Creator of All Matter?

Now the LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day.  When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth, and said, "My lord, if now I have found favor in your sight, please do not pass your servant by.  "Please let a little water be brought and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree; and I will bring a piece of bread, that you may refresh yourselves; after that you may go on, since you have visited your servant." And they said, "So do, as you have said."  So Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah, and said, "Quickly, prepare three measures of fine flour, knead it and make bread cakes."  Abraham also ran to the herd, and took a tender and choice calf and gave it to the servant, and he hurried to prepare it.  He took curds and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and placed it before them; and he was standing by them under the tree as they ate.

Chapter 17 begins by saying that God appeared to Abram (v.1) and when He was done speaking to Abraham, He ascended (v.22).  From this I gather that this was a physical appearance.  One thing said in that personal encounter was that Sarah would bear Isaac by this season the following year.  No mention was made of the hospitality of Abraham.  In that conversation, Abram's name is changed to Abraham, the name used in chapter 18.  The impression given is that 18 happens afterward.  Yet in chapter 18, the same comment about Sarah bearing Isaac around this time next year is made again.  It's just weird.  Now the other content is different, like God being called El Shaddai in 17, and Yahweh in 18.  Also circumcision is prescribed in 17, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in 18.  There are obvious glaring differences, but the subtle similarities are also striking.

But whatever is thought about the relationship between the two, one glaring difference which has always arrested my attention is the hospitality of Abraham.  In 18, he sees "three men" so runs, and bows down before them.  The first verse says that Yahweh appeared (much like 17), and Abraham calls Him Lord (not by name).  But Abraham's behavior is not as one to an equal (like Mamre and his brothers) but as to a Sovereign.  It's his behavior that suggests Abraham knows exactly Who has shown up at his tent.  Abraham's response is hospitality.  So, what does one feed the Creator of all matter?

From Abraham's choice of items, it seems that his best beef and fresh bread is what makes the perfect meal served with butter and milk.  He also stood by as their waiter, attending to their every need.  The scene then, as Yahweh informs Abraham of the coming of Isaac (again?) is the three men seated beneath the "Oaks of Mamre", enjoying the fresh meal, Abraham standing to attend to them, and Sarah listening at the tent opening.  It makes an interesting setting.  This account of a personal visit by the Maker of all things has engaging story elements, and visualizing it is much easier than in Chapter 17.  In fact, the whole encounter in Chapter 18 is more experiential or existential (as those terms really should be understood, not as philosophy has redefined them today). 

The point where these verses hit me most personally is in Abraham's immediate response to seeing the three men.  He recognizes his Master and immediately responds with hospitality.  Would I be able to really recognize my Master so well?  If I did, would I be able to keep my wits about me enough to be properly hospitable?  What does "properly hospitable" even mean when my Master comes to visit?  How is it even possible to be properly anything where a personal encounter with God is involved?  He makes stars!  What can I do, what do I feed, what do I say that can "properly" respond to such a One?

Abraham simply does what his cultural traditions dictate is done when an important person comes by.  He is himself in his setting at that time.  And his Master participates.  They wait, they eat (really?), and then have a conversation with Abraham (and Sarah as it turns out).  God is pleased with Abraham's preparations and treatment of Him.  Isn't it important to note that the Creator and Master of billions of galaxies accommodates the traditions and culture of one of His creatures?  I think I get so caught up in what "form" my Master may want, but when He hasn't "prescribed" a "form" I think this passage reveals that He isn't concerned about the form as much as He is the encounter, the relationship.  He does so much concern Himself with what format my prayers are in, as much as He is that I pray.  When I sing in worship, He is not so concerned that I am on key as much as He is concerned that what I sing reflects my adoration of Him.  It's not what's on the plate, it's that I serve it to Him.  Now, that is grace.  Well, I better get cooking, you never know who's coming to Sunday lunch!

Finding My Master in Sin CIty

Now the angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. (Genesis 16:7 NASB)

Why would the Angel of the LORD be on the way to Shur (southern region of Canaan near Egypt)?  My guess is that He was looking for Hagar.  The promise to Abram wasn't involved here.  This isn't about the land nor about Abram's descendants.  So, why do this?

This is clearly an act of grace, but it takes place in the midst of Hagar's consequences for mistreating Sarai.  Since she was the surrogate she didn't have the status of wife (per se) since she was the hand maid.  She would have known that, so it's very possible that she mistreated Sarai out of pride.  She sinned, and yet here is the Angel of the LORD looking for her.

The character of the LORD shown here is so reminiscent of Jesus.  He sought the surprising people to show favor.  The widow giving only one mite was worth His rapt attention and praise.  The tax collectors, Levi and Zachaeus were both worthy of His attention and friendship.


I see the same pattern with me.  I fall down and He raises me up.  He seeks me when in the midst of my temper tantrums, doldrums, and pity parties.  Right now, I'm doing great.  I'm in "Sin City", Nevada, yet here among the smut, I realize my Master is still seeking me.  I'm not sinning, I'm not running from the consequences of my past, and I'm not sunk in pride.  Not at the moment.


Finding that I've been found my Master is so comforting.  It reminds me that He truly is close, He has my back, He loves me, and I am called to submit to be His servant.  Even here surrounded by self-centered indulgence I am a Knight of the Realm, Servant of The King.  Well, it's time to grab my lance and horse, and get back to work!

Grace in the Midst of the Storm

But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD. (Genesis 6:8 NASB)


"Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall enter the ark -- you and your sons and your wife, and your sons' wives with you." (Genesis 6:18-19  NASB)

The "favor" found by Noah in the eyes of Yahweh was in the midst of Yahweh's repentance that He had made humanity.  The word used in Greek for this favor is normally translated as "grace".  Thousands of years later, this word would be defined by the Son of God sacrificing Himself on a cross, and then defeating death in resurrection.  Here, grace is defined by the survival of one family and pairs of every animal.

So, grace and favor from God are not only very ancient concepts, but ones found even in the midst of God's wrath.  Love and wrath bound up in the same Person at the same time is confusing.  Yet how often am I angry and yet still love the ones with whom I'm angry?  I also find it comforting that I can find this grace of my Master in the midst of His wrath.

Last night, old patterns of thoughts crept back into my mind.  I shoved them away, and dwelt on other things, but it troubled me that they were back.  I know why they were there, I just don't like that they were there first, before other things.  I don't like that I had to consciously switch gears to get on to other things.  I don't want to be this way.  I suppose I have to continue my lessons, training to think differently.  I had hoped I was further along though.

So this morning I am tired.  I have a small group meeting tonight that I have been anxiously looking forward to for 2 weeks now.  We will discuss Genesis 6, perhaps the whole chapter, perhaps less.  I don't want to have that discussion tired.  But that choice has been taken from me.  I will have it while tired.  I will peek from out of the fog of my thoughts into the eyes of the others, and we'll discuss the giants in the land, the frustration of God, and the grace He gave to Noah.  Perhaps He'll share of that grace with me tonight?

Humility, Ability, Swords and Armor

One of the things about Paul that always sort of intimidated me was his confidence in his own devotion.  In 1 Corinthians 15:10 he speaks of himself working harder than all the rest.  Even though he ends it with, “but not I but the grace of God with me” it still sounds like boasting, except I suspect he was right.  He seems like one of those people I run into from time to time who are so driven they reveal my own devotion for the poor sad façade it really is.  On the other hand, I need to be very careful here.  If I call my devotion sad and poor, I need to be careful to step on myself, and not on what my Master can and does do with me.

There are things I can control and am responsible for such as spiritual disciplines of one sort or another.  These things put me in greater availability to my Master.  As He uses me then things happen that have little to do with my abilities or condition.  I consider myself moderately successful in my past ministry, but not by the number of people saved, but by the effect I had on saved and lost alike.  I saw those apart from the church return, and I saw some never “churched” receive Jesus as Savior.  I was in the process of relationally reaching out to my community even when I was being undermined by some of my church leaders.

The success was not because of my ability.  What abilities I had and have lack the power of what my Master does.  I can “manufacture” somewhat something that looks vaguely like success.  But when my Master is the One succeeding, it is astounding.  So, I have to be careful where I point out my faults.  As long as they display my Master’s power and glory, I’m on the right track.  And I remain on the right track as long as I don’t tread on His power and ability.  I am not worthless, Jesus’ death proves that.  I am not worldly successful, though I have been blessed financially in this place (at least I think of it as blessed financially).  But I do have areas to work on in my life.

The areas where I lack are in my thorough devotion to my Master.  I let the influence of other people override the voice of my Master.  He makes divine appointments for me and I miss the out of fear of other people.  This is America, so it’s not fear of prison or physical harm either.  I clearly fear appearing foolish in their eyes.  What I can’t figure out is why I care.  I hardly know anyone here.  Why would I care what they think?  And even if I did know them, still, so what?  I used to be afraid of messing it up, but I have learned that my Master has that handled.  I act as more of a place-holder for the presence of my Master; it’s not my ability anyway.

So, my spiritual disciplines need to run more toward increasing my devotion to my Master, and practicing overcoming my fears.  That sounds deceptively easy.  I have always had more trouble attacking than defending.  But the gates of hell not prevailing against the confession of faith means it’s aggressive, not defensive.  I need to don my ill-fitting armor (on loan from my Master, so it doesn’t fit me well), grab my borrowed sword and shield, and get into the fray.  Okay, deep breath. One, two…THREE!!!  AAAAHHHHH!!!! (let’s hope this doesn’t end with a thud)

Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, November 30

Grace and the Value of People

Once I explore the cross of Jesus, then travel through Saturday to the Resurrection, and then consider the possibility of living in both this physical world and the spiritual one; only then does the shape of grace begin to emerge.  It begins to clarify with the cross, and through the resurrection it gains definition, but then I see what I have been doing to myself spiritually and I see what my Master thought was such a price.  It is appalling to see what my Master purchased at such a cost. 

The value of sin-ridden, selfish rebels (aka humans) is found in the price paid by their Creator.  They have value just in that they were created by such a One as the Creator of the universe; that’s pretty remarkable and imparts value.  But their condition from that point on is a downward spiral.  Like fish or cut fruit, we go bad very fast when left to ourselves.  So the short shelf-life might be expected to reduce the value unless there was some gain or other payoff.  The pride of people in general, that they can somehow achieve the good standing they need, or all the good standing necessary, removes any such gain or payoff.

The value of human creatures is not found in the short supply, the supply grows at a staggering rate, and the value of life seems to plummet along with it.  The value of human creatures is only found in the going price paid by their Creator.  The realization that my value is found in my Master and nowhere else is not comfortable.  I want to have some power over my value, and I have no positive effect at all.  I want to somehow control my eternal fate, and all I can do is choose to submit to my Master.  I want to be able to gain the attention of others for my standing before my Master but I am outshined.

It is my continual self-centered nature that desires these things, and it is the grace of my Master, the freely given declaration of righteousness, that imparts value to my life.  My life is full of rebellion against my Master, limited self-centered assessment of my surroundings, and grandiose claims of importance.  But my boast should be in Christ alone, and Him crucified.  What I have to boast about, point to, and accept in my heart is that all my value comes from my Master; His extreme bid for a relationship with Him.

But I also need to recognize my value among my fellow human creatures.  It wasn’t for one that my Master paid such a price, but for the whole cosmos.  It was not just for me, but for my neighbors too.  The value I find in what my Master has done for me is the value of those around me as well.  There is no room for feeling superior or as if I am distinct in any other way than that I benefit from this value, and many of them do not.  Clearly there is no room for me to assess myself any higher than those around me. 

It is an underlying philosophy or philosophical position that when everyone is special, no one is; that specialness implies uniqueness.  That’s true in our cultural use of the word, but from the perspective of my Master, humanity is special in relation to all of creation.  His wider perspective does impart uniqueness to people, but not among themselves, among the rest of creation.  So, again, my value is along with, not over and above the value of others around me.  I’m not special among people (although I am fairly unique), I am special because I am a person; as is everyone else.  And yet there are the “elect” in Scripture; another evidence of grace.

Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, November 28

What? Am I already perfect?

So, does Chambers really think that I'm not saved unless I stop sinning? I doubt it. The main part of the entry sounds like it. But then he refers to 1 John 1:7, where the point is not perfection but fellowship. That makes more sense, but even John seems to go back and forth over this idea.

I am not perfect, nor have I had much perfection in my life with my Master. Has it only been in the past year that I have been saved? Has it been shorter since I have slipped since then? Or has my addiction been a struggle to repent within my life with my Master?

But regardless, when I think of what 2 Corinthians 5:17 means; the amazing thing that must have have happened for it to be true; then I am floored! How can I be a recipient of such blessing? A new creation? So what was once dear to me or major parts of my previous life are gone. My old errors are gone. That's amazing grace. And it isn't about timing, in the sense that I can get too bad for my Master's grace to reach.

The point Paul makes in 1 Corinthians 5:17 is that my Master has involved me in His ministry to reconcile the world to Himself. He has, in Christ, made atonement for my rebellious nature toward Him. And then He began to work on that nature to transform me into the image of His Son, Christ Jesus.

So, because I'm in Christ Jesus, I am a new thing, the old things passed, stuff has become new things. Just because I'm in my Master, not because I'm good enough, or attained some sort of spiritual maturity. Thank you, my Master.

Oswald Chambers - Readings - November 12

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0

How Was I Saved? I’m Confused

Some years ago, while I was interviewing for a ministry position in Oregon (which I didn’t end up getting), I got into a discussion with the pastor about what salvation requires.  He and his church held the belief that baptism was required.  I do not.  But he made a comment that I had to concede.  He said that Baptists believe that repentance precedes salvation, so they add something we do as well.  I have to agree that Baptist doctrine does include repentance as preceding salvation.  But he and I disagreed on what that meant.

I wish I had been familiar with Chambers’ entry from this morning.  That would have helped a lot.  My lack of reading and familiarity with various thoughts on this issue is part of my problem.  I hold views that I don’t always remember how I got into.  I’ve been out of school for quite some time, and some of the required reading has faded in detail. 

Putting the cause for salvation on Jesus and His work on the cross and resurrection is easy until the problem of why some people are not affected by it is added.  It is at that point where a “selection process” is obviously at work, but not really understood.  The normal fall-back position for “Calvinistic” positions is the Sovereignty of God; He chooses whoever He will for salvation.

Only so much stock can be put in being able to choose to believe or follow Jesus.  It is more likely and easier to support that believers are chosen rather choosers.  If that’s the case, then the faith to receive salvation is as much of a gift than the salvation itself.  The reception of salvation is not from me, my ability to understand, or even my ability to submit and receive.  Frankly I don’t have a lot of demonstrated ability that way.

So, when Chambers says, “I am not saved by believing; I realize I am saved by believing” what he is doing is putting the cause of the change of my state from “sinner apart from God” to “rightly relating to God” on the action of God through His Son, Jesus.  I don’t figure it out and believe or submit to the idea and believe.  My state is changed, God reveals that to me, and I believe that.

There is a problem with this view and the essence of my American cultural paradigm.  I want to have a hand in my status.  I am free to choose, I have freedom to do whatever I want; either follow God or not follow God.  But Paul tells me that even the faith is a gift of God and not from myself.  When he goes further to say that it is not from works, that means that it is not my obedience or belief as works or actions on my part.

I have no boast before my Master.  I have nothing to bargain with, or even for.  I can’t threaten to walk away any more than I can threaten to hold my breath until I die.  I’m not capable of either.  It’s not that I won’t, I can’t.  Something about this seems wrong, as if now I am the robot that I had hoped my Master would make me.  Why would it be that for salvation I have no choice, but daily I have to choose to submit to Him?  So I have choice once I’m saved, but not in the salvation itself?

My views and opinions are really of no value here.  What is needed is Scripture.  Unfortunately, that is something else I can’t remember.  I don’t remember which position is based on which Scripture.  Until I find that, this is just an opinion, and I accept that it’s not necessarily a popular one.  I don’t particularly like it either.  I’m not a flaming 5-point Calvinist, or least I don’t want to be.  I have to admit a certain affinity for some of those points though.  There, I’ve confessed it.  Confession is the first step toward recovery right?  Perhaps I can gain back some semblance of autonomy from my Master.  But is that what I want, really?  I feel a sense that Romans 7 is creeping up on me again.  I need to dive into Chapter 8 for safety!

Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, October 28