What's A Good Son To Do?

"For as long as the son of Jesse lives on the earth, neither you nor your kingdom will be established. Therefore now, send and bring him to me, for he must surely die."  But Jonathan answered Saul his father and said to him, "Why should he be put to death? What has he done?"  Then Saul hurled his spear at him to strike him down; so Jonathan knew that his father had decided to put David to death.  Then Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did not eat food on the second day of the new moon, for he was grieved over David because his father had dishonored him. (1 Samuel 20:31-34 NASB)

Between a rock and a hard place really doesn't adequately describe the position of Jonathan, the eldest son of King Saul.  From reading 1 Samuel, Jonathan knows who is right in the conflict.  His loyalty is to his father, but also to his friend (if that word is strong enough), David.  Yet, he stays with his father.  It's a decision that eventually costs him his life, but it is a cost he is willing, and probably knows he will have to pay. 

The reality is that there is more to Jonathan's life in Gilead than we see initially in 1 Samuel.  He has a family of his own, wife, kids, and so on.  We know this from the actions of David later on when he shows favor to Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan, crippled when the Philistines overran Gilead and he was being carried in the escape.  So there was much in Jonathan's life that complicated his loyalties besides who was right and who was wrong.

In a sense, this is a position we all face.  The choice of loyalty is often too easily criticized by those on the 'outside looking in' based on their perception of moral right, and moral wrong.  Often there are issues of responsibility to family, responsibility to community, and so on that override the other 'moral' issues. 

So the tension between right, wrong, and responsibility is what can put me between a rock and hard place.  What character do I need to live in this space?  Right now, based on some things I've experienced just recently, I need courage and determination to act.  And I need to implement those qualities faster into situations.

I believe that it's one thing to be courageous, but it's not enough.  I think the willingness to act, and the determination to act are necessary to translate courage into action.  Sometimes the competing loyalties cause a delay in action.  That's where I think I need to improve.  I can't even say that I'm delayed by 'thinking about what I'm dong'.  It actually has more to do with motivating myself to do what I already know I need to do.  Pushing myself should never be the factor that delays my actions of courage.  At some point it becomes a lack of courage.

So, as I encounter rocks and hard places, I pray that my Master will bring out in me not just the courage He calls forth in His knight, but also the willingness and determination to act required of those called to serve such a Master.  I want to be a good servant, but I also want to be a good warrior; and that requires fast action.  I want to be like Jonathan and choose those responsibilities I have been given by my Master over the other good I find attractive. 

Idolatry: Representative Worship

To whom then will you liken God?
Or what likeness will you compare with Him?
As for the idol, a craftsman casts it,
A goldsmith plates it with gold,
And a silversmith fashions chains of silver.
He who is too impoverished for such an offering
Selects a tree that does not rot;
He seeks out for himself a skillful craftsman
To prepare an idol that will not totter
(Isaiah 40:18-20 NASB)

One of the ideas in the Bible, Hebrew and Christian Scriptures both, with which I really struggle is the admonishment against idolatry.  In most cases, it seems that the perspective of the Bible is that the person worshiping the idol thinks that the object really IS the god rather than a representative OF the god.  The problem I have is that this is obviously not the case.  I fear it puts Scripture in a place of appearing silly.

That idolatry is representative of the 'god' is obvious for lots of reasons.  First off, I don't think anyone would either accuse an idol worshiper or seriously believe they think for a moment that the gold or whatever object in front of them actually performed the activity in their myths ascribed to the 'god'.  Some statue of Zeus isn't actually the person believed to be on Olympus.  It looks like, represents, the person believed to be on Olympus.  I don't think this is in dispute, not by anyone.

So what's the deal with such a clear and vehement imprecation against idolatry?  There is a clear prohibition against any sort of 'image' of man or beast or fowl in Scripture, I'm curious; why?  The usual answer is that it's distracting from worship of the One true God, Creator of those things normally cast or shaped, and the Creator of the things imaged. 

The point being that He is neither man nor beast, so there is no true representation possible.  The worship of the God of Israel reinforces this concept.  All items that could have been used as a 'focus' of attention during worship of Him were hidden.  The bronze snake from the desert was put in the ark along with the 'budding staff' of Aaron, the broken tablets of the Ten Commandments, a jar of mannah, and so on.  Then the ark itself was secreted away behind curtains within the deep dark recesses of the Temple.  So worshipers would only be able to see the building where they knew those object were housed, not the objects themselves.  The focus remained on the invisible God.

But the people bowing themselves before a figure of a man/bird/fish/lion-thing really didn't think that the object in front of them was whatever deity they worshiped.  They believed their deity was 'invisible' as well.  So why the hiding?  Well, I don't know.  I'll just say it and outright because I think anyone reading this already knows I don't know.  For most people the explanation in the previous paragraph is probably sufficient, so you need look no further for 'ideas' or 'theories'.  I will pose two.

First, I suspect that there is a psychological reason.  It is the Creator of this universe who also created our human brains/minds, and I believe He is well aware of our psychological make up and weaknesses.  So, I suspect that focus on the object seen becomes more important, more influential, and more fixed in our minds than the 'Invisible God of All Things'.  I think the truth of this is borne out unfortunately in churches where disputes over trivial 'objects' and 'trappings' sometimes take precedence over focus on the One True Invisible God.  So, they are distracting, but on a more psychological, deeper level than just what we see when we bow ourselves down to something.  In this way, a cross, statue, painting, window, or whatever can cause the same problem.  Some of you may be thinking Catholic right now, but any Baptists reading this could easily substitute 'carpet', 'drapes', 'paint color', 'furniture', or even people and note the same problem.

Beyond the psychological possibility I think another issue is the understanding of 'holiness'.  Simply put, anything exclusively dedicated to the service or use of God (or a deity) is holy; it's not to be used for common (profane) purposes.  Rather than get into a protracted discussion of holiness itself and how I believe God uses and defines the term, I want to look specifically at why the use of idols may damage His purpose in holiness.

Idols are closely tied to a 'shrine' whether small ones in a home or larger ones in a location, to entire temples.  Things in and around the idol, within the sphere of the 'shrine' are considered holy.  In a sense this is what the Jewish Temple was in Jerusalem.  The object within, but also the grounds around were considered holy.  It's clear in Leviticus and other places that this is what God taught the Sons of Israel.  But it was never the whole understanding of the term.

The people of Israel were also called a 'holy nation', a 'kingdom of priests', and designated as a 'chosen people' making even the normal 'common' person someone holy.  The nation was supposed to be a 'shrine', their communities, homes, and national boundaries.  This changes some fundamental understanding of 'holiness'.  There were prescribed behaviors they were to follow, not just in the Temple, but in their homes, communities, and as a nation.  There were elements of the very basic elements of their lives where God insinuated Himself.  There truly was no 'shrine' in Israel, they were the shrine.

It's the representative idol worship around them that distinguished them and made them different.  That is what made them holy; they were different.  Some, very powerful nations, considered them atheists because they would not worship idols.  They could not conceive of a form of worship that was not 'representative'.  These 'idols' formed the diplomatic means to connect nations, their myths formed common bonds, and their practices enabled trade and commerce.  Israel stands alone outside this 'fraternity' of idolatry.  Like circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, and their dietary rules, this refusal to worship like the other nations caused difficulties for them wherever they went, with whomever they dealt.  That was the idea; it was by design; they were holy to the One True God.

So, that's my theory (or two of them), and while not very exciting or enlightening, and not even close to a full explanation; I think that between the three ideas, I have a better understanding of why 'images' are problems for my Master.  But I also think I have a good clear admonition to not let 'things' distract me from my Master; not people, crosses, flooring, clothing, trappings, sound systems, screens, music, or instruments.  None of this stuff or people should be able to drift my focus from my Master.  For, as the people of Israel considered themselves holy, so do I; psychologically and socially.

Who Am I To my God?

Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand
or marked off the heavens with the span of his hand?
Who has gathered the dust of the earth in a measure
or weighed the mountains in a balance
and the hills in the scales?
Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord,
or who gave Him His counsel?
Who did He consult with?
Who gave Him understanding
and taught Him the paths of justice?
Who taught Him knowledge
and showed Him the way of understanding?
(Isaiah 40:12-14 HCSB)

One of the frustrating things about Job is that God never answers Job's challenge as to why Job was suffering.  It is a difficult book in which to find a 'comfortable' answer to the problem of evil and suffering in the world.  God's answer to Job is essentially to ask, 'Who are you to ask me anything?' which is not what we want to hear.  It works for Job though, and he is restored.

Here, in Isaiah's word of encouragement to the Jewish Exiles in Babylon, it sounds somewhat similar to God's response to Job, 'who are you to question God?'  The questions sound silly compared to who God truly is and what He's done.  They are supposed to sound silly.  They bring into sharp relief the faith of the people; the lackluster, thin, weary faith of a people tired of their circumstances.

So, God has measured all the waters in the hollow of His hand.  In the day of Isaiah, the world was thought of as table on legs (pillars) and covered by a dome.  But it was surrounded by water.  Think about it, water came from the sky, so there was water up there.  Water could be found by digging deep enough, so there was water below.  There were streams, rivers, and a sea.  Water was everywhere.  So when God holds the 'waters' in His hands, that's more water than we might first imagine.  It rivals the water we know is on the earth today.  The idea is that the hands of God are big hands.

God has marked off the heavens with the span of His hand.  So that dome over the earth He hammered out in creation, He measures it with the space between His pinky and thumb spread out, a span.   But we know the 'heavens' to be much larger than a dome over the earth.  We've renamed it 'the universe' and it is immeasurably huge.  I don't think the imagery needs adjusting though.  I suspect that using the imagery of the universe being God's 'desk decoration' would fit nicely into the point the writer is trying to make here.

He has measured the mountains, the dust, and hills in scales.  Again, God is unbelievably HUGE!

But who has guided Him?  Who has given His Spirit direction or counsel, increased His understanding, taught Him the ways of justice or knowledge, or understanding?  Obviously, no one.  It's a rhetorical question to draw out the silliness of the people's lack of faith; their irreverent questioning of the unknowable One.  Later on, the poet states that God's understanding cannot be measured for depth. 

But the poet is writing to encourage, to lift up, and lead people out of their focus on their circumstances.  He is leading them to turn their focus on their God, their Maker, the One having created all things, including their enemies.  He is posing these questions much in the same way God posed them to Job, to lead him back into faith.  It's as if to say, "I've got you covered, why would you doubt Me?"

So, I read these questions.  I too look at my circumstances.  My biggest issue is that I don't like one particular aspect of my job.  But it's my wilfulness and not the job that is the problem.  My focus has been on me and what I want.  I'm being selfish.  I have excuses for being selfish.  I have plenty of them.  But then I have to ask these questions.  Suddenly, my selfishness stands in stark contrast to my Master's character.  Had He been selfish, He would have left me lost.  But He redeemed me.

So, having been redeemed by the One whose understanding cannot be measured for depth, why would I then be frustrated by an aspect of the job He provided?  Am I smarter than Him?  Should I have counseled Him, or taught Him the way of understanding, or the paths of justice, or anything?  Duh, of course not!  Even asking the question is silly, but my lack of acceptance of what my Master has provided does exactly that.

What I mean is that when I refuse to accept willingly the circumstances provided by my Master, then I ask those very ridiculous questions.  He led me to this place, provided this job as I went, and has kept me in it as I have worked.  But this past year, I have fought it.  I have railed against one particular aspect of this job and convinced myself that is is not in my character to do it.  What am I thinking?! Seriously?

How can I charge that an aspect of the job given to me by the One having created me and shaped my character, the One constantly changing me, metamorphing me more into the image of His Son, gave me a job that is inconsistent with my character?  Really?  I know more about that than He does?  I know enough about the purpose and direction He is taking me that I know this is the wrong job?  And I know this because there is only one aspect I don't like.  You see how amazingly ridiculous I'm being about my job? 

I will accept my job.  I will take on the spiritual discipline of my job, all it requires, and I will learn to love it, and through it, my Master more deeply.  I will start today, hour by hour, and do the thing I'd rather not do.  I will do it in the afternoon's when I'm tired, the mornings when I'm sharp, the mid-day when I'm ready for something else, and the end of the day when I'm having trouble seeing the point.  I will do it.  I will do it for my Master Who gave it to me; Who blessed me with it, and sees a purpose in it.  I will do it.  To me, that is faith; small and somewhat petty, but faith.

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.

The Wait of The World 2: More Lessons Learned

Why do you say, O Jacob, and assert, O Israel,
  "My way is hidden from the LORD, And the justice due me escapes the notice of my God"? 

  (Isaiah 40:27 NASB)

One element of Hebrew poetry is parallelism, and within that can sometimes be found chiastic structures (parallels forming an 'X').  The reason chiastic structures are important elements is that the 'crux' of the structure forms the focal element of the poem.  So it helps understanding the poem to be able to spot these structures.

In this verse is the only full chiastic structure I could find in the last passage of Isaiah 40 (v. 27-31).  There could be many more before this, and this could form a part of a larger chiastic structure, but I didn't look anywhere but in the last 5 verses.  The reason this one is interesting is what forms the crux.

The major parallel structure is found in the quote, and the parallel is chiastic in nature.  There are three repeated elements, and they are repeated in exact reverse in the second half of the parallel (see the image below).  So elements A, B, and C are repeated in a, b, and c, but in reverse order.  This focuses importance on element B/b.

The way these elements show up in the quote is as follows:

• A = 'hidden'
• a = 'escapes notice'
• B = 'my way'
• b = 'justice due me'
• C = 'LORD'
• c = 'my God'

So, literally:

Hidden / my way / from the LORD
Of my God / the justice due me / escapes the notice

So the focus of the quote (and therefore the exiled Israelites) is their way and their justice.  It's on them. 

That's what this poem taught the first audience, what they understood it to mean.  Is it any less of a critical lesson today?  We as believers and followers of Jesus are in 'exile' in a sense since we're not home yet.  We long for that home, for restoration, for completeness, and for the presence of our King.  Yet it's the focus on our situation, what we don't have, what we want, our rights and entitlements that keeps us from experiencing the Kingdom; the presence of our King in this exiled state.
This is the dangerous trap I fall into; focus on my way and my entitlement.  It blinds me to the eternal qualities of my Master.  What I have heard, what I have known of my Master I forget and ignore because I'm too focused on my own stuff.  The power I lack and the endurance I need come from the One I have been ignoring!  The solution I seek through my own power and ability is obscured by my own self-centered (and therefore self-destructive) attitude. 


Today is time for a change.  The challenge for me is learn this lesson for today, all day, every hour; in dealing with my customers, my family, my co-workers, and my community.  Will I focus on the eternal qualities of my Master, will I 'hope expectantly' in my Master knowing what I have heard, and living that out?  The alternative isn't pretty, and hasn't been working; so the only thing I have to lose is more time spent as a loser.  I think I can do without more of that.

Wait of The World

Why do you say, O Jacob, and assert, O Israel,
   "My way is hidden from the LORD, And the justice due me escapes the notice of my God"?
Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth
  Does not become weary or tired. His understanding is inscrutable.
He gives strength to the weary, And to him who lacks might He increases power.
Though youths grow weary and tired, And vigorous young men stumble badly,
Yet those who wait for the LORD Will gain new strength;
  They will mount up with wings like eagles, They will run and not get tired,
  They will walk and not become weary.  

(Isaiah 40:27-31 NASB)

I 'stylistically' broke up the above passage into some sort of poetic structure.  The meter is lost in translation, and the parallelism is obscured somewhat.  I went through and connected the poetic parallels to a degree (there are overlapping elements I didn't 'map').  And I peered into the message the writer was sending to his audience on behalf of his Master.  Strangely enough, I learned some things:

1. The people of God complain (even today) about Him.
2. The complaints of God's people are expressions of thin faith or no faith.
3. The qualities of the God of Israel refute the complaints of His people.
4. Two of those qualities, endurance and the source of endurance in people, form the focus of this message.
5. Even those expected to outlast everyone come to the end of themselves at some point.
6. Those relying of the God of Israel never do.

These are the surface things, clearly stated and supported by the parallelism and comparisons of the passage.  But then I add myself to the passage; I am the complainer, I am the one tiring out and fatiguing.  And I am the one with thin faith.

The question beginning this passage is an excellent one, "Why complain?"  Why would I complain about my Master?  What circumstances could I be in that would refute or even disparage His eternal qualities and promises?  What has He done that is not sufficient for me?

The 'audience' of this passage reside in exile from their homeland.  They are captives and cannot return.  If they did, they would return to rubble and ruin.  They were 'waiting' on their deliverance, and it was slow in coming.

This is not my circumstance.  My life is ridiculously good, hilariously so.  And yet, my problems still obscure my view of my Master's eternal qualities.  How can this be?

My view is obscured because I focus on me.  The litmus test is my perspective, my feelings, my thoughts, my attitudes, and my actions.  When all those things within my boundaries become my 'world' I will complain about my Master.  I complain because all those things are insufficient to accomplish anything but to point out how insufficient I am to deal with this world. 

Hopefully, I wake up quickly, refocus on my Master, and gain that sustaining perspective found only with my Master.  I'm not waiting on my 'deliverance', I'm waiting on my Master.  Paul can say that he can do all things through Christ who strengthens him because of his focus on his Master.  That's the only way.  And so it is for me.  Will I be distracted by my circumstances and complain, or will I wait expectantly on my Master and mount up as if I were an eagle?  I'm ready for some 'flight time'!

One And Many: Divine Church Design of Ephesians 4

In Multiply by Francis Chan, the second section, "Living As The Church", begins with "Life In The Church".  That chapter mostly wraps around Paul' description of church in Ephesians 4:1-16.  It's a passage well worth some detailed study.  Paul puts a ton of stuff in a small amount of space.  I'm going to walk through the passage as it broke down for me.

First, there is the call.  The call should inspire us to live in humility and enduring patience; essentially a shorter list of the Fruit of the Spirit (i.e. Galatians 5:22-23).  But here Paul makes much of 'unity', providing a long list of 'ones'; one body, Spirit, hope, Lord, faith, baptism, and Father.  This unity is part of the response to the call.

Then Paul contrasts the unity and 'ones' with what we each have.  So to each of us was given a gift; and rather than one gift, there are many.  He then cites (perhaps incorrectly) Psalm 68:18, inferring that not only did Jesus give us gifts, but also fills all things; therefore has authority over all things.  The point Paul makes is that these many gifts come from one Source, and that Source is Supreme.

Paul then lists some of these 'gifts' specific to 'roles' or 'positions of leadership' in a church rather than the typical list of 'Spiritual gifts' he lists elsewhere.  These gifts are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers.  It's not a list of leaders; overseers, elders, and ministers (deacons) are missing and would be expected to be here if this were a list of leadership positions.  Instead it's a list of gifted 'roles'.

The work of these many roles is equipping for service and enabling growth as the body of Christ. The goal progresses through unity of faith and knowledge of Jesus into complete maturity of all that Jesus is.  What happens then is that outside influences of erroneous teaching and perspectives don't create chaos in the church.  Instead, speaking the truths of Scripture, we all grow into that mature submission to Jesus, the One uniting us, holding us together in love.

This is a great picture of how local churches can function.  I don't think it happens very often.  I know I fail in at a few places along this progression.  I'm pretty sure others struggle in the same areas and a few others.

First off, all this stems from living inspired by my call.  This is the first place I struggle.  I'm not 'inspired' by my call.  I know I'm called, and I worship within that call, but my actions aren't driven by it as they should be.  In other words, that the Creator of the universe has specifically called my name to relate to Him has little influence in my life.  Others around me, just as frail and silly as I am are more inspiring to me.  I worry about what they think, what they want, or what they do; rather than being driven by what my Master thinks, what He wants, and what He does.  It's totally backward and ludicrous.

The second area this falls apart for me is in the short list of 'fruit'; humility, gentleness, patience, and so on.  Those are impossible without the inspiration of my calling.  They are also the only way the unity of the Spirit can be maintained, so I'm hung there as well.  Because of this progressive failure, when I do teach, even the content of the 'ones', it fails to build and equip because I don't have those other qualities that validate my teaching.  Clearly I'm not living out what I teach, so why would others learn from me?

So, my goal is to find that inspiration.  The content of my personal study and my corporate worship needs to be full of wonder of this calling, and I need to be focused on the One calling rather than the noise of those around me.  This is what will transform me, and with me, my church, and with us, our community.  And then the world.  I'm in.  I'm on it.