The Visitation of the Lord: Jesus, my Redeemer

Then the glory of the LORD will be revealed,
  And all flesh will see it together;
For the mouth of the LORD has spoken." (Isaiah 40:5 NASB)

Get yourself up on a high mountain,
  O Zion, bearer of good news,
Lift up your voice mightily,
  O Jerusalem, bearer of good news;
Lift it up, do not fear.
  Say to the cities of Judah, "Here is your God!"
Behold, the Lord GOD will come with might,
  With His arm ruling for Him.
Behold, His reward is with Him
  And His recompense before Him.
Like a shepherd He will tend His flock,
  In His arm He will gather the lambs
  And carry them in His bosom;
He will gently lead the nursing ewes. (Isaiah 40:9-11 NASB)

One of the most difficult qualities of Jesus for any believer, and impossible for one who is not a follower of Jesus, is His quality of deity.  It's much easier to consider with the sterility of 2,000 plus years, but when that is ignored; when a follower is able to put themselves in the day of Jesus, imagine the sight, the smell, the feel of the heat; the impossibility of it begins to settle in.

It is impossible to imagine.  The very 'holiness' of the Creator is a definitive argument against it.  How can the Creator of the thing enter into the thing made?  He would be obviously too large, too powerful; a mixture of apples and stars, yet without the same atomic similarities.  And yet, Jesus is God.

The Christian Scriptures clearly make this point.  But the people following Jesus after His ascension didn't have the benefit of those Scriptures, they had only the Hebrew Scriptures, and the testimony of the Twelve Apostles, the remaining memory of the life of Jesus.  They made the leap of understanding, imagined the impossible, and embraced it in faith.  It was crazy.

So where did they find the support in Scripture for this ridiculous view?  How could they support such a ludicrous position with Scriptures that never seemed to support this as an expectation?  No one in the day Jesus arrived expected that any sort of anointed divinely designated savior would be divine Himself.  Of course no one in that day really understood the problem Jesus came to fix either.

Yet, in Isaiah 40, in the Hebrew text of that passage (and even the Greek version) give a glimpse of such a possibility.  As the prophet writes of the eventual return of the Jewish Exiles in Babylon, he makes two interesting declarations; declarations that connect with the concept of the "Day of the Visitation", when God 'shows up'.  This was always conceptualized as God working through someone to bring about His wrath, deliverance, or consolation.  But the concept could also be taken concretely.

In Isaiah 40, the prophet writes that the 'glory of the LORD will be revealed'.  The word choice is interesting though.  The word for 'revealed' is in a 'passive' voice of sorts (Hebrew doesn't really have a clear passive voice), but is a word for 'exposure', usually in a humiliating sense of being stripped or being lewd.  The picture is of the Creator/Deliverer throwing off His cloak and standing out uninhibited in all His 'glory'.  Regardless of how immodest or demeaning you may think this of the Creator of the universe, it still requires Him to be present doing it.  He has to be the One doing it, as it is written.

And then later on, the writer is calling on the 'crier' to declare to the cities of Judah, "Here is your God".  And the following description is both of a conquering king and a tender shepherd.  This is clearly a statement, albeit a poetic one, of God's visitation of His people.  His presence among them declared in pretty clear terms, yet it's 'imagery' 'poetic license' and can't be taken literal.  Or can it?

The problem Jesus came to fix could only be fixed by the Creator.  Only He could also be the Redeemer.  Only the Almighty, the One calling for the stars by name, only He could also restore His human creatures.  It wasn't to reestablish the preeminence of the political entity of Israel that God entered the world He created.  It was to form a people from both Jews and Gentiles bound to Himself for eternity that He condescended to become the lowest form of humanity and redeem them all back to Himself.  Who else could fix such a problem?

So with the prophet, I ask

Who has directed the Spirit of the LORD,
  Or as His counselor has informed Him?
With whom did He consult and who gave Him understanding?
Who taught Him the path of justice and taught Him knowledge
  And informed Him in the way of understanding?

 And I rest in the salvation of my Master.  It's a good day.

You Were Serious About That?

"Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt.  Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'" (1 Samuel 15:2 NASB)

But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were not willing to destroy them utterly; but everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.  Then the word of the LORD came to Samuel, saying,  11 "I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands." And Samuel was distressed and cried out to the LORD all night. (1 Samuel 15:9-11 NASB)

There are several things here on which I could spend several entries. This is one of the richest chapters for theology and life with my Master in Scripture.  But one in particular is one I have been quick to judge and slow to really appreciate.  Because of that, I have missed that I make the same mistake Saul and the people make.

Essentially God gives a command that was not carried out during the time Israel was in the desert and coming into Canaan.  Since the Amalekites weren't destroyed in the desert, they continued to harass the people after they entered the land.  They would sweep in, plunder, and sweep back out again.  Rather than produce anything other than sheep and goats in the desert, they stole from other nations who had farming.

In chapter 14, they are referred to as the ones plundering Israel.  So consider what the people find when they attack Amalek.  They find all sorts of things, some which they may have owned at one time.  This has to incite anger.  In obedience, they devote most of it to God; but in disobedience they keep the best, they plunder the ones having plundered them.  They intend to bring it back and offer it in sacrifice to God, so they'll use in worship, and that should make up for having kept it.

The problem is that in sacrifice of the type they describe, the people share in the sacrifice, it's not wholly consumed in the fire.  They intend to share with God what they plundered, even give Him the good parts, but not all of it.  God required all of it.  In fact it was supposed to be considered so holy, no one was to touch it at all, but it was to be completely destroyed in place.  No herding, no trading, and certainly no eating.

Would it have seemed a waste to them?  Would it have seemed "excessive" to them?  Would it have seemed unreasonable to them?  It probably would have to people today.  In fact, I believe such a sin is committed by people professing faith in Jesus today, in church, all the time.  We tend to have a dysfunctional concept of holiness today.  This dysfunctional holiness means we find it easy to disobey.  The two go hand-in-hand.

My last entry was about being terrified of my Master.  This terror, I claim, leads to obedience.  I believe this is true partly because the wrath of God punctuates His holiness.  He is 'other' than us, inexplicable, powerful beyond measure, and with unimaginable thoughts and reasoning.  We cannot see from His perspective unless He shows us a part of it.  All we have of Him is what He shares with us, and those parts are pretty peculiar, and sometimes very scary.

But when believers, such as myself, make the Master of the universe a warm fuzzy 'nice guy', or loving kind sweet old man, we've set up an idol of our own making.  This idol we can disobey, this idol looks a lot like the god of the world, the god of atheism, the god projected out of the sinful selfishness of frail faulty human creatures.  This is not the same as the God having spoken the universe into existence. 

To the degree that this sort of distorted image of God exists in our minds, we are able to easily disregard certain rules asked of us by God.  Certain Scriptures can be taken lightly or ignored all together.  But there is a price for such a profane view of the Master of galaxies and quarks.

It is not easy, once having setup such an idol, to then go back and change it.  We set expectations of continued comfort when we begin with such an idol.  I have.  When I realize what I've done and try to change it, it get's thrown back in my face.  My failures, my mistakes, and sin are dredged up, and shown to me for what they are.  So how then can I judge who have done the same things?  How can I teach Scripture who have lived my life deviated from the teachings of Scripture?

I can be honest about both the failures and the consequences, the most common of which is the dredging up and resulting shame.  It's both a failure and a consequence (you have to love a double whammy like that).  The reality is that I have to teach that Scripture reveals that God does not tolerate fornication; but that I have been guilty of it, and have paid a price for it (and will continue to pay I'm sure).  I have to teach that God reveals through Scripture that He desires me to be a good diligent worker; but I am guilty of poor work quality, and sometimes really struggle with giving a good days work for a days pay.

It's not excusable that others do the same thing. It's not okay that I'm not alone in this.  Those are the same things said by Saul.  He blamed the people, but he was their leader.  It was on him to lead well and in obedience.  I'm not a king (thank you, my Master, for that!), but to the extent that I have leadership responsibilities, I too have the responsibility to lead people in obedience.  I must teach the truth of Scripture, not just the comfortable ones I like and I know others will like, but all of them.  And I must do so, knowing and owning that I am a "law breaker" just as all the rest.

So the answer is to worship my Master as holy and powerful beyond measure.  A certain degree of absolute terror is in order.  To honor Him in Scripture is to consider Him 'heavy', His words 'weighty', and in practice, myself as crushed by His presence and His words.

Now, the obvious error here is to run to the other direction and become so focused on the "laws" of Scripture that I judge on legalistic grounds.  What Scripture also teaches is that the holiness of my Master is transferred by Him to me.  I don't get it by working for it, as part of His grace, He gives it.  He is able to transform the ignoble, the common, and the profane into objects and acts of holiness.  So, He can use my failures to redeem others.  I can become an example of His grace and redemption as people see what I was and what He has made me. 

I can't be as I was and expect Him to use me.  In fact, in the example of Saul, it was his unwillingness to change that brought on his eventual rejection by God.  So, even then he was used by God, but as a bad example.  God redeemed Saul's mistakes within His divine purpose, but the man was lost.  So my failure to submit to my Master's commands will not thwart my Master, but may thwart my usefulness in His Kingdom.  In fact it has.  The continued submission to my addiction meant that I have been sidelined from ministry.  As I have emerged from this idolatrous submission to my selfish passions, He is able to use me more.  Yet His use of me always has the requirement to own that life I lived, and the different life I live now; as long as it is different.

So, today, I will walk as a crushed man before my Master.  I will walk as an example of His grace and mercy, and also His wrath.  I will live my life with the understanding that my life is not really mine and never has been.  I will obey partly out of fear of Who I obey and the consequences of disobedience.  And I will teach what He reveals to me in Scripture, owning my own failures to live it out, but striving to obey.

The Danger of Being Loved by my Master

Samuel said to the people, "Do not fear. You have committed all this evil, yet do not turn aside from following the LORD, but serve the LORD with all your heart.  You must not turn aside, for then you would go after futile things which can not profit or deliver, because they are futile.  For the LORD will not abandon His people on account of His great name, because the LORD has been pleased to make you a people for Himself." (1 Samuel 12:20-22 NASB)

"Only fear the LORD and serve Him in truth with all your heart; for consider what great things He has done for you.  But if you still do wickedly, both you and your king will be swept away." (1 Samuel 12:24-25 NASB)

Samuel makes his last public address in Gilgal after Saul has been ratified as king for the second time.  In it he asserts his own innocence and calls the people to affirm it and God to witness.  Then he affirms the faithfulness of God, while simultaneously the faithlessness of the people; right up to asking for a king.  Then he calls on God to punctuate what he's saying to the people by spontaneously bringing thunder and rain (out of season).

The people are terrified and call on Samuel to continue to pray for them so they won't die.  His response to them is mostly above.  I chose these two elements out of his response because they bring out a part of God's character which is sadly misunderstood today.  In my childhood, my Master was not described to me this way, at least that's not what I caught from the teaching.

What way?  Well, while I do remember the power of my Master to create and shake His creation, sweeping away His people wasn't one of the elements I remember.  Think about the two elements, one that He is pleased to make a people for Himself, and two that He will sweep them away for causing evil.  They appear contradictory, but obviously aren't.

Here's what I believe is missed about the character of my Master in this passage.  I believe that my Master demonstrates enormous grace and mercy in His choice of me.  Clearly there is nothing inherent in my behavior and attitudes that warrants such attention from my Holy Creator. But the love of my Master for me is also guided by His holiness, which constantly directs me into more of this same character.  In order to accomplish this direction, my Master will sweep me away if necessary to remove me from an environment where I have lost my moorings to Him.

Is that a lot to get from this passage?  Probably.  But this passage occurs in the larger history of the sons of Israel for whom this is exactly what happens.  But this larger story continues on to their restoration, at least partially, to their former place.  What is also true is that the these sons of Israel do not then cease to be the people of God's choice.  So, neither will I.  But as they suffered, and have suffered, neither will I be exempt from such treatment from my Master.  Why would I?

I believe the rational of my Master behind this is the larger story in which the history of the sons of Israel is placed; where my Master seeks to redeem His entire creation.  He chooses a people to use to redeem the rest of the people, including me.  Yet if He will not spare one from being "swept away", why would I believe He will not sweep away the others?  If He does not spare the first chosen from suffering, why would I believe He would spare me? 

Do you see the character quality of my Master peeking through?  But do you see also the critical implication?  There is a danger is drifting away from a pure devotion to my Master.  When I mix it with devotion to things, people, circumstances, and the elements of my life on this planet; then I am in danger of being swept away by Him Whom I have forgotten.  Swept away, along with all the stuff, people, and circumstances I found so distracting.  Perhaps this is an implication of Jesus' words, "If anyone wishes to save his life he will lose it, but whoever loses His life for My sake and the gospel's he will save it." (Matthew 10:39, Mark 8:35, Luke 9:24)  Keep in mind that in these passages, "life" is actually the word "soul".

What I see as my response to this passage is to serve my Master with all my heart.  It confirms the words of my Master to me that I am His servant.  He gave me that designation many years ago in my youth, and I rediscovered it some few years ago while seeking to climb out of my addictive behaviors.  I needed to know who I am, and my Master's definition of me included the designation of His servant.  So that is in my "signature": SOTK, Servant of the King.  The danger of forgetting this is real, tangible, and for my sake because of His holiness and love for me, inflexible.  Now where's my dish towel?  I think I hear my Master calling!  "Here I am, my Master!"

Mine Irony Forms A Foundation

Now there was a certain man from Ramathaim-zophim from the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. He had two wives: the name of one was Hannah and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.  Now this man would go up from his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice to the LORD of hosts in Shiloh. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were priests to the LORD there.  When the day came that Elkanah sacrificed, he would give portions to Peninnah his wife and to all her sons and her daughters; but to Hannah he would give a double portion, for he loved Hannah, but the LORD had closed her womb.  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. 8 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?" (1 Samuel 1:1-8 NASB)

 De oppresso liber is the motto of the US Army Special Forces.  It's on the patch signifying the whole element in the Army, and it is part of the warp and woof of their training.  It means, "To liberate the oppressed", and if you follow their methods and activities, it fits most of the time.  The US Army Special Forces, within the larger umbrella of "Special Operations Forces" is unique.  They are less "commandos" and more "mentors" among foreign people groups, not even nations as much as people groups. The people groups are more often than not, oppressed in some way.

From just a cursory read through Scripture, it seems my Master has something of the same interests.  He tends to work through the oppressed to accomplish His goals and purposes.  He chooses the unexpected, the least powerful, least respected, least wise, and the most obedient (or those are the ones who make it into written record).  As the Book of Samuel begins, irony stacked on irony sets the circumstance into which Samuel is born.

Hannah means "grace", and it's the name my wife and I chose for my daughter.  She was a gift of my Master's favor to us.  So, "Grace" has no children, but her husband's other wife has plenty.  So the first irony is that "Grace" has no gift of children from the Maker of all things.  It's a hard irony because of the other ironies with which it occurs.

The second irony is Hannah's husband is a devout man, going yearly, faithfully to worship in Shiloh, paying vows, and making sacrifices.  He is faithful, and he shares his faithfulness with his family, all participate.  Yet, this faithfulness does not garner Hannah a child.  He and his household's faithfulness to the Master of the universe does not warrant the giving of a child to one named for His grace.  This too is a hard irony.

The third irony is that Hannah is loved by her husband partly from pity of her inability to bear children.  He would give her a "double portion" from the sacrifices, giving his other wife and her children one portion each.  So neither her name, nor the faithfulness of their family, nor the love of her husband is enough to warrant children from the Master.

The fourth irony is the treatment that Hannah gets from her "rival", a very interesting Hebrew word for "one who provokes another to active anger".  Hannah would fume at the treatment of the other wife, trembling and weeping.  Her husband's response would always be, "am I not better to you than ten sons?" which was a silly question only a man would ask.  This was the bitterest irony, the one of hate out of jealousy for love which was only there because of pity.  The nexus of all these ironies, her name, the love of her husband and hate of her rival, all revolves around the irony of her closed womb.  Hannah feels nothing like an example of the grace of the Master she worshiped so faithfully.  Then the Divine Special Force steps in, and the oppressed are liberated.

The normal view of this book is to look at this account as a setting for Samuel and no more.  But the stark contrast of what was and what my Master brought about is part of why Samuel's origin is so dramatic.  The drama out of which he is born is part of what sets him apart.  It provides the reason for the quality of his holiness before his Master.  Samuel would not be who he became without his mother enduring what she did before he arrived.  The history of Israel, the people of the Maker of all matter, hinged on the painful ironies of a humble woman named, Grace.

How often to I complain of my "suffering" which is really nothing of the sort at all?  How many times, caught in such an irony as Hannah experienced, do I blame my Master for His oppression of me?  I'm not alone in that since some Psalms express the same lament, but it's here in this humble beginning of Israel's last judge that I see that my Master does not waste a pain endured.

This isn't a competition for who endures the most pain either.  This account is different from other accounts in Scripture, but the point remains much the same.  It would seem that redemption, as my Master practices it, is transformational of people and circumstances.  Order does not seem to be important to my Master's method.  It seems that the person at the end of the transformation is His means to accomplish His purpose among His people.

So, pain and suffering in the life of the people of their Creator is simply the sharpening of a tool He will use to save and dispense His favor on them.  It would seem that my Master prefers irony as a teaching tool.  Like parables, few find them, but those who do hopefully live richer lives.  I'd like to live my life as miner in search of the ironies of my Master.  Which means I have stop whining, start searching, and praise and worship my Master every single day, and every part of every day.  How ironic that I found this one, and miss so many others.  Well, let me grab my pick, shovel, and "lighted helmet".  I've got some digging to do.

What Do I Give The One Who Has Nothing?

But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, "Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.  In the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways; and yet He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good and gave you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness."  Even saying these things, with difficulty they restrained the crowds from offering sacrifice to them. (Acts 14:14-18 NASB)

What do I tell someone who has absolutely no knowledge of any religion but some hogwash they've been fed since infancy?  How do I somehow convey the wonders of the One True God, Master of all the universe, and His love for them?  Left to ourselves, such sacrifice as my Master made on our behalf seems completely unbelievable.  Who, having such power, would do such a thing for powerless people such as us?  Logically, it works in no culture's paradigm.

I could go back to the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil, and start there with what is wrong with the world, and how my Master fixes it through Jesus.  I could relate how futile it feels to work to serve without any sort of recompense, no knowledge of a master.  It's easy to relate that since that's how we, as humans, manage others.  Everyone would get that part; it's the solution of my Master that strikes sideways, a round idea ill-fitting our square brains.

Paul and Barnabas took this task on, head on.  When in Lystra, after healing the crippled man, they tried to restrain the crowds from offering sacrifice to them.  The argument they used was essentially three parts: who we are, what we do, and Who we serve.  They said they were people like them, that they came to proclaim good news, and that this news came from the One True God.  As they describe this new Deity to those with so many for so many centuries, they make some claims:  1) Living God, 2) Creator of heaven and earth and sea, 3) previously permitted error, 4) has tried using seasons and good things to woo people back.

Such a portrait of deity is vastly different from what the people worshiped.  That region was the path between continents, and was fought over for centuries, by Babylonians, Assyrians, and Persians.  Yet even before these empires, the Hittites ruled there, almost as ancient as the Egyptians, the first to unify these dispersed mountainous rebellious regions.  These have always been a harsh people in a harsh region, and they stubbornly held to their religious culture.  No empire could do more than change deity names, because their idols, symbols and practices stayed much the same regardless of who sat on which throne.

The approach of Paul and Barnabas was interesting.  They couldn't just "change names" as other had done since there is no pantheon.  They had to somehow use one deity as a bridge to the One True God.  This is not easy since it was very common in pantheon lists to have the primary deity worshiped be one of the secondary deities in the myth rather than the one responsible for all the others (father deity).  This forms a dangerous place for preaching Jesus, the Son of God, and yet maintaining One True God.  This very neatly fits the erroneous theological structure of "father-creator" and worshiping a "son" who interacts more with humans (but typically does not "play nice" with them). 

Instead, Paul and Barnabas choose (I think by divine inspiration) to form the bridge by claiming that the theological framework of the people was their attempt to understand the One True God, "In generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways..."  So, the idea was not to form a bridge, but rather a launch pad.  There could be no connection between their pantheon and true theology, there wasn't room for both.  They would need to leave their old framework behind.  And this is a rough crowd with whom to attempt this tactic.  It seems to have had some success.  At least the sacrifice stopped.

What can I use to achieve such a connection with those around me with such dispersed "theological frameworks"?  Most are more apt to believing in "Bob the beer-guzzling god" than Jesus.  I have spoken with very intelligent "agnostics" who prefer a "cafeteria style" of theology rather than acceptance of some cohesive existing belief system.  The illusion of control and power to form their own view of deity isn't that different from what Paul and Barnabas faced.  "Change what you want, conquer us if you can, but we will still believe what we want."

While the One True God has permitted this in the past, He does so no longer.  Jesus is His answer to the problem we refuse to face, sin.  All things He defines from the foundation of a relationship with Himself.  Life, death, sin, and redemption are all formed from the perspective of whether He knows us or not.  What began as the knowledge of good and evil was the deviation from the knowledge of our Master.  The very origins of humanity stem from this foundation, "does our Master know us?"  This not a question of facts, because He knows all facts about us, even the ones we don't know.  This is a question of friendship, of camaraderie, of relating with our Master.  Does He know us?  Will that be the claim on the day all humanity stands before His throne of judgement?  It will be my claim, based on the work of Jesus to make it so.  It will be by Jesus alone, or I will stand apart, rejected by my Master.  I have nothing to offer One forming stars.

Well, that's it.  Have a great day!

The Odd Man In

Now there was a man at Caesarea named Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian cohort, a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, and gave many alms to the Jewish people and prayed to God continually. (Acts 10:1-2 NASB)

One of the purposes of Scripture is achieved through irony, in that it denies the expected, and affirms the unexpected. This is one of the great lessons from the Master of the universe to us about Himself.  It's as if the point He's trying to make with us is that we can't reach Him, He must reach us.  By that I mean that He cannot be comprehended by our minds or imaginations, so He has to teach us about Himself.  If He didn't, we'd never know Him.

One of the truly laughable aspects to philosophy when it seeks to grapple with theology (of any sort), is how rules that cannot be assumed to be true are.  The fundamental assumption is way too often that anything or anyone responsible for our universe should somehow fit within the bounds of our ability to rationally understand it/him/her.  It puts the philosopher in charge, and the Maker of the universe in the "hot seat" to be interviewed and judged.  Could anything be more ridiculous?  With all we don't understand and all we know we don't know, why then would we expect that anyone responsible for all of it should be knowable?

Here's my basic premise:  I'm looking for the One revealing Himself to me, and Who's revelation is inexplicable.  So, for instance, God revealing Himself in a "Trinitarian Nature" is the sort of thing that matches this criteria.  God requiring that any relationship with Him be on His terms, that meets this criteria.  That any relationship with Him is always initiated by Him...oh wait.  Well, in a sense that's true, but only in an oblique manner with Cornelius.

Cornelius comes from a polytheistic background, "family of origin", and culture.  That background and culture has rewarded him with position and responsibility.  He controls 100 soldiers who are Roman citizens by birth, and birth in Italy, the Roman homeland.  Yet, he is in the land of Jews, who dislike the Romans in the same way bulls dislike bull riders.  And with all the unmistakable animosity toward him and his people, his presence and role in that land, he still seeks to leave his religious paradigm and adopt theirs.  And he's not alone, because many of his household and soldiers follow him in this choice.  This is an irony.  I have to assume that there are some very important details left out which explain how he came to this point in religious life, but the point here is that he has arrived at this point in his religious life.

God takes this guy, who has overcome a lot of barriers, and essentially introduces Himself to him.  The Ethiopian on the road home is somewhat like this.  He too had to overcome tremendous barriers.  He sought God anyway, and God essentially introduced Himself to him as well.  Here's my question, would I seek to overcome such barriers?

I have been given every advantage to find Jesus.  He surrounded me from my birth.  I was taught about Him from my earliest memories.  Regardless of how accurate that teaching was (some was spot, some not), I was equipped to carry on and learn from Him directly, from Scripture.  I haven't had barriers except the ones of my own deceitful heart.  I haven't had difficulties in seeing my Master, He has always been around me.  And so, in some way, I have become complacent with my faith.  It's been easy.

This one who had no advantage except by accident of military assignment, goes against everything he has been taught and brought up on to seek this strange god from a strange unfriendly land.  I have always had my Master dropped in my lap, and encouraged to seek Him.  In fact, to not seek Him would be to go against my upbringing and everything I have  been taught my whole life.

So what would I have done in his situation?  Would I have overcome the barrier of my resentments toward those who hated me?  Would I have sought to worship their god, their way, and honor them with help for their poor?  Seriously?  How easy is my journey to the Maker and Sustainer of the universe?  How easily do I take it lazily, stray from it on a whim, and treat it like a stroll through a park?  I am way too often a poor soldier for my King.

I have struggled with the possibility I believe what I do because that's what I was taught.  There may be still some truth to that, but I have wrestled with my faith, and still it remains.  I am now struggling with the thought that my Master brought me through the route to Him that He did because He knew I wasn't up to a more difficult challenge.  That should humble me, and yet it should also encourage me.  Consider the love of the Master of atoms and suns that He would arrange it so I would find Him.  The same love that sought out Cornelius and arranged for him to be in Palestine among a contentious people of God, also placed me where I would find Him.

How is a relationship with the Master of all matter not initiated by Him?  How am I, in my foolish weaknesses, not in the same line to see Jesus that Cornelius is in?  My barriers have always been of my own making, and yet my Master has always brought me through them, much like Cornelius.  They are different barriers, but the same love.  The Ethiopian eunuch, the Roman soldier, and me...not what you might expect. 

Don't Skip The Mistakes!

The patriarchs became jealous of Joseph and sold him into Egypt. Yet God was with him (Acts 7:9 NASB)

Stephen is faced with the powerful elite of his day.  He is accused of things that he would have trouble defending because they are false, but true enough to still get him in trouble.  So in this situation, what should he do?  Well, obviously, tell his audiences favorite story.  It's a long story, so he can't possibly include everything.  What does he make sure he includes?  He doesn't miss the mistakes of the people.

Like pot holes on your favorite road, these "mistakes" mar an otherwise uplifting story.  So why include them?  Because he is headed somewhere.  This road that looks so good and feels so right, isn't headed where his audience thinks it is.  These mistakes are what good storytellers call "foreshadowing".  They are the clues about what is coming in the story; ripples on an otherwise cool calm pool.

So why take this road faced with such power?  Because his point is the same point Jesus made.  His direction for his audience is the same direction Jesus took.  Things among the Jewish people cannot remain the same.  Their world is about to change, whether they like it or not.  Jerusalem is going to fall to utter destruction...again.  But their God wants them to choose between the way things have been going, and the new world He has for them.  He's been giving them lots of foreshadowing (prophets and events), but now has come the time for choice.

I believe Stephens words are so strong, so hot, and so deep because the choice is that important.  These "ripples" are just the little quakes before the earth quake comes.  These foreshadowing elements connect the dots all the way back to their origins.  They have always made mistakes, and God has always brought them through, weaving those mistakes into His own design. But the time for mistakes is over; they've reached the end of the thread woven through their history.  It ends with Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ, the Son of God.

Can I look back and let my Master show me how He has woven my mistakes into His design, and begun my redemption from before I was born?  Actually, will I look back?  Will I let my Master show me these things?  Or will I cover my ears and gnash my teeth?  I never really liked gnashing, I much prefer a good story.

The Cross, Duty, Reality, and Jesus

I’m going to make a statement that may sound really…heretical perhaps, until it’s thought over.  The event of the Cross of Jesus does not sanctify me in and of itself.  The event of the Cross of Jesus saves me, and I have a relationship with my Master based on no other action, only His.  Yet I am sanctified as His Spirit works through that relationship to modify me; conforming me more into the image of my Master.  As that happens, I am made holy and fit for His use. 

What I have to accept is that my relationship with my Master is based on nothing other than His sacrifice on the cross on my behalf.  And that is true for all humanity.  One of the difficulties I have with this is that I find it very difficult to view my Master through a lens so differently than my human relationships.  He is not a man that He should change.  Yet I keep thinking that, once saved, I then continually have to work to retain my status before Him.  I have to work to maintain my relationship with my wife, my friends, my co-workers and company.   I don’t have to “work” to retain my relationship with my Master.

What good I do as a result of the relationship I have with my Master I do as an overflow of that relationship.  Hopefully, I can’t help but do right things.  The goodness should be a Spiritual Fruit of that relationship, not a duty.  Not that there is no duty involved in my relationship with my Master.  I am His servant, and servants have duties, and I have mine.  Obedience implies duty, even requires it.  But duty for One having done so much for me is a joy, not a burden.  Duty is an obligation I have, in this case, because I have obligated myself.  The obligation is part of the covenant I entered into with my Master.  And this covenant is heavily weighted to my benefit.

I am saved from destruction I earned through my rebellion against the Master of the universe.  He redeemed me from this destruction and offered me a covenant agreement that provides me eternal life in heaven.  What I give Him in exchange is all the stuff I tried to build on my own, the junk I once thought so precious.  The obligation I have to obey and the duty I have to perform is part of the result of the covenant.  I confess Jesus as Lord (Yahweh, Master, King) and that confession obligates me to obey.  It really is sort of silly to look on it as a tough thing though, as if I have to enslave myself, giving up my freedom and indenturing myself.

The King of all matter, Creator of the universe from proton to planet to galaxy, is already King without my acknowledgement.  My confession only acknowledges what is already true, He is King.  And it submits me to the One already in charge.  In a sense, my confession reframes my paradigm to reality rather than continuing in the paradigm of the illusion that I am in control of my environment.  On the surface, Americans recoil at the thought of “enslavement” but when the reality is discovered that we already are enslaved, it’s becomes a whole bunch easier to choose.  Enslaved to death or enslaved to life; it’s my choice.  Hmm, let me think.

The hard part is that considering myself as “in-charge” is how I used to define freedom.  It is how the world I live in defines it.  But in reality, submitting myself to my Master and obeying Him is really freedom; freedom from death, freedom to live out my purpose, freedom to walk the streets of heaven, and freedom to worship the One True God.  I have a master of some sort regardless of what I think.  The reality of this universe is that humans are enslaved.  But through the work of Jesus Christ, I can now choose my master, whether my selfishness and the enemy, or the One True Master of the universe; life or death, blessing or curse.

So, I am saved by Jesus’ sacrifice of Himself on the Cross.  And I am sanctified through His Spirit throughout the rest of my time here on earth.  It is while I am in that sanctifying process that I gladly serve my King and perform my duties He has given me.  And in all of this, I enjoy reality without illusion, seeing the universe as it is, and spending time with the One responsible for it.  Is there anything better than that?

My Utmost for His Highest, Oswald Chambers, December 8

Living Life: That’s the Hard Part

Seeing death as relational rather than physical I thought was pretty radical.  But it makes even more sense when I put sin in the same relational basket.  Now the reason death is relational is explained.  If sin is choosing independence from the Master of the universe, then sin would be death; being out of relationship with the Master of the universe.  On the other hand, since I can’t bridge the gulf in that relationship, I would have to be dependent upon what the Universal Master would do on my behalf.  So, Jesus is the solution placed before me.  The terms, “redemption” and “rebellion” now fit better into my understanding of the solution and problem with the world.

I don’t like dependence.  I don’t like going to the doctor or dentist for that reason and more.  I don’t like not being able to direct my destiny.  But, on the other hand, by giving up my independence and my destiny to the Universal Master, I gain access to Him.  So which is better, directing my destiny on this lump of space rock, or sitting down with the One having created space and everything in it and learning about Him?  Sure, as an American, I want independence, I was born to it, I have a sense of entitlement to it.  But I have another human condition which places me independent where I was never intended to be.  I belong in a garden.

So, when I consider the solution of the Universal Master to this human condition, I see a burden as massive as the shear crush of history and future of the human creatures crawling over this terrestrial ball.  All that hereditary isolation from the Creator, couched in the terms of independence, was summed up and consumed in the penalty paid by my Master.  For me, the event of Jesus’ death is more than an event of physical suffering; the physical suffering was almost a parable compared to the unthinkable amount of suffering at its climatic end.  When my Master, having revealed Himself as Three, suffers a separation within Himself, then suffering is redefined, and I cannot wrap my mind around the enormity of it.  That separation is the undeserved, substitutionary death which bought my access back into the garden.

But I’m not there yet.  This redemption I have gained the benefit of which was so expensive is not yet complete.  So, here in this place, I am directed to model my life after this indescribable gift.  I have been redeemed, and I am to live in this universe as such.  What does that look like as I relate to my wife, my daughter, my friends here in this community, and my church?  Claiming to understand life and death, dependence and sin, blessings and curses is all well and good.  But understanding is borne out in living.  If I really understand, then I will live in this world.  If I behave as if I’m dead, then what do I really understand?  And why do would I live as if I were dead?  For me, it is usually out of fear.  How ridiculous is that?  I have life but am afraid to live because of what the dead people might think.  Really? Seriously?

I am a fool, that much is clear.  I just need to become fine with being a fool for my Master, considered such by the dead around me.  I have spent too much time being a fool before my Master, acting foolish in His eyes.  How much that has cost me I will not know until I give an account of myself before His throne, but one day I will know.  The irony that strikes me to the heart is that, even as I played the fool, His love and grace never waivered.  He hated the sight of what I did, yet His love and desire for me never dimmed.  Even in those times, He had my back, keeping me from the deadly deep waters around which I played.  He kept me from things I can’t imagine, and the enemy was never able to snatch me from His hand.  Unbelievable, yet I am a testimony to its truth.

Today, my wife and daughter head to the Sierra Nevada’s for a weekend retreat.  I will be here holding the home for their return.  I will be alone in one sense, but I will be communing with the Universal Master in another.  The question is will I give into my compulsion for independence or will I surrender my right to myself to my Master.  It’s easy to choose life on the front end of the day, in the beauty and cool of the dawn.  It is another to hold that choice in the heat of the afternoon when reality bears down hard.  I hope to be able to post tomorrow that I enjoyed victory in my Master today, and then to post that again on Sunday.  That’s what I hope, I pray for that hope to be a fertile seedbed for faith, and that faith to lead me to love as I am loved.  Life is relational, and so my Master leads me to live.  I may be visiting you later, just humor me, I’m following the lead of my Master; I’m just not as graceful at it as He is.

Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, October 7

The Cross or the Grave, or Both?

Is it a semantic thing to combine the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus rather than to focus on the crucifixion?  I find myself very alone on this issue.  Here, I’m the one appealing to my buddy Paul.  He seems to focus on the resurrection with the cross rather than the cross alone.  The passage in 1 Peter mentions that Jesus took our sins to the “wood”, and does not mention the resurrection.  The context is about Jesus suffering and using that as an example for our daily conduct.  But I call the day approaching, Resurrection Day rather than Easter.

In my way of thinking, to focus solely on the event of the crucifixion is like half-baptizing.  If the resurrection is not an equal component, then leave people under the water.  I was “raised to walk”, out of water, but also out of my dead ways.  Here is my divergence with a lot of “cross theology”":  I believe that Jesus did not overcome sin on the cross, but rather in resurrection.  Sin brings death, and He suffered that on the cross, but He went beyond the penalty into life, and it is that life I experience instead of death.

Is this semantics?  I don’t think so.  It could be though, because I am fairly lonely in my view.  Most seem to believe that Jesus paid it all on the cross and because of that we have life.  I only pause at the cross, and then, when it is finished, keep walking for an entire lonely Saturday, and wait by a guarded grave.  It is here I believe I will witness the conquering of the penalty I have worked so hard to earn.  Had I stopped at the event of the crucifixion, I would have witnessed the physical death of a man.  But having witnessed the crucifixion, I can then in the resurrection witness the re-united Triune God wildly overcoming my circumstances.  Again the ground, terra-firma, is shaken.  The shocked and grieving creation is again shocked, but the grief is shattered in joy as the One through Whom all things were made once again emerges into all those things.  Angels, guards, stone rolled away, and an empty tomb are all setting for this second of impossible events.  They fade into gray as the light of the Son shines forth from what was once dark.  Here I sit, here I worship, here I am undone as God wins my war.  The cross is where my salvation starts, but I must follow through to the empty grave, where it is finished.

Oswald Chambers' "My Utmost For His Highest": April 6th.

Choosing a Master on the Cafeteria Plan

I figured Oswald Chambers would get here sooner or later.  But he also goes as far as I've heard ministers go on the subject.  In Romans 6:16, my ministry buddy, Paul describes the situation to the church members in Rome where what ever they give themselves to becomes their master, whether sin or obedience to God.  Where Chambers goes with this is to run with the slavery picture Paul uses.  So, to whatever I present myself as a slave into obedience, to that I am a slave.  In other words, initially I choose to serve something (or someone) and after that choice is made, I am a slave without choices.

The first step of the 12 steps is, "We are powerless to control __________ and our lives have become unmanagable."  This does not describe how we got there.  The focus is on the situation at hand.  The choice of masters has been made and I am a slave without choice, powerless, unable to manage my own affairs due to the clamoring of my master for my attention.  For some this is alcohol, others it is narcotics, still others it is eating, shopping, sex, work, co-dependency, and then finally, my favorite category, "hurts, habbits, and hang ups."  Whichever I choose becomes my master and all other pretenders for the position must wait, family, friends, work, and God. 

Chambers cuts right to the heart of the step one when he points out that, "the first thing to do in examining the power that dominates me is to take hold of the unwelcome fact that I am responsible for being thus dominated."  Where he does not go (in this entry anyway) is into what to do about it now.  He says that only yielding to Jesus will break every form of slavery in my life, but how is that done?  How is it that I make the transition or change in masters?  After all, if I am a slave having once made my choice, I no longer have the ability to choose, even to choose another master.  He says as much, but then concludes, as do so many others, with choosing Jesus.  I can't!  That's the point!  I'm a slave, and yes it's my fault, but I'm still a slave.  Accepting that I am to blame for being a slave to whatever doesn't magically change my allegiance.  Something else must happen.

Slaves are freed in one of two ways.  Either someone (including themselve) buys them in order to free them, or they escape.  The latter is rarely a guarantee, and even the first one has dangers for some.  Paul goes to great lengths to describe God's solution, in fact this may form the essence of the entire Book of Romans.  God does act to free me from slavery.  He redeems me through the action of His Son, Jesus.  What Jesus has done is redeemed slaves, paid debts of the borrowers, taken punishment on Himself to appease the wrath earned by the guilty, achieved amnesty for the rebels, and balanced the requirements of justice reconciling the unjust with the justice of a Holy and Perfect God.  He is a busy Person.

So, what's the problem?  If Jesus has freed me from my slavery, why does it still have an effect?  The answer is contained in the context of the verse, verse 16.  I still choose.  The action of Jesus freed me to choose again, but I still must submit to someone.  What I do that causes me no end of pain and frustration is I try to dodge the problem by choosing myself, taking up my own mastery.  The problem with this choice is that it is never really myself I end up choosing.  Here's why.  First I choose myself, life gets a little crazy and, like everyone, I need help.  So I turn to something, it could be anything, for help.  But the help I want is to feel better, something to ease the pain and discomfort of life.  It is in the moment of that dependent choice that I again enter into slavery to something, whatever that something I imagine will make me feel better.  By choosing myself, since I am not up to the task of controlling the circumstances of this life I live, I will always seek another. 

Jesus' is not surprised here.  Eventually, neither is Paul.  What they both understand, and I am learning slowly is that I need to choose Jesus right up front to avoid the problems on the back end.  When I do, the pains of this crazy life situation I live within does not go away, but the acceptance and dependence upon my Master Who loves me like crazy enables me to do what I could never do before.  I can endure with peace, and experience a transformation of those circcumstances into opportunites to serve my Master.  It's crazy to think that before I was still serving a master, but afraid to let anyone know I was a slave.  Yet everyone I am around is in the same situation I am.  We are all slaves to something, whether we like to admit it or not.

So, how do I choose Jesus on the front end?  I believe two things are needed: 1) Practice, daily practice.  Choosing every day, hour, and minute to practice choosing Jesus.  B) Accountability.   Remember, that for me, accountability is part of why I write this blog.  This is not to say that I have been duped into believing that these are the only two things needed.  There are other things, but all the options taken, whether 12-steps, or counseling, or any other option, all must contain the two I mentioned.  These are the only two things that work for me.  Now, let me also say that I have struggled for over 20 years to break free from my favorite smelly nasty dog toy of an addiction.  Sure, I know I need those first two things, but while the first may be easy to say, it is extremely difficult to do.  Once I fail in the first, it's really easy to circumvent the second.  Then it is a short fall into the mire from which I can't rise on my own.

So, keep reading this, holding me accountable for what I write.  When I miss day, please complain.  It's not for you I write, but rather it is for me you read.  I hope, and believe, that God will help us both, but I do not do this for others.  If I did, I would want thanks, and attention, and "kudos", and whatever.  I do this because I have to in order to maintain some semblence of sanity and connection to my Master.  So, I thank you.  If you comment or don't that's fine.  The One I really want to please is my Master.  I wish He would comment once in a while (or do I?).