As I continue to read through Mark and his take on the lessons from Jesus, it occurs to me that there are things that Jesus does that confound me. The gospel Luke continues the thought in Mark with the interaction of Jesus and the "sinners"
Mark 2:17 "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners"
The gospel Luke illustrates that Jesus felt far more at ease with the "sinners" than he did with the righteous. His nickname in the early part of his ministry was "friend of sinners" Not really meant as a compliment. He was targeted by the religious gatekeepers as one who shunned them and partied with the outsiders. I think they were a little jealous that he liked the sinners better than he did them.
I think we sit this far from that time and want to call it evangelism and feel guilty that we really aren't very good at it, and if truth be told, not really interested in it. You see, to take on the mission of Jesus we have to find a way to become friends to people that are a handful under the best of circumstances, and they are rarely in the best of circumstances. Jesus let these folks get close to him. In fact, he invited them close. He had meals with them, he let them touch him enough to heal up their sickness, he went to their kid's weddings, he went to their funerals, I am guessing he went to their birthday parties, he drank their wine, he ate their food, and he offered them redemption.
So what does this mean to us? It means we have to break loose from our church clique and make some friends. I don't think the world particularly wants or needs our version of church. They need a friend, a true friend, a friend without an agenda. I can call my friends whenever I need to and they aren't suspicious that I am trying to sell them anything, not Amway, not insurance, not a worldview. They know I simply like to spend time with them. In some small way I think this is the reason we are here. There is a pretty select small group that I have influence on, God created me to befriend those folks. Pretty mundane this kingdom stuff, but it has eternal consequences.
The second thing this means to us is that once we enter the kingdom, the gospel is really no longer for us. The gist of the gospel is GOOD NEWS, news is only news once. Have you ever been in a conversation with someone where you know all his stories. There is nothing new there, it has all been said and done. Look at the words of Jesus at the beginning, I came for sinners. If you have entered Kingdom residency the gospel is now yours to dispense. It is not my point that we no longer live by the example of Jesus, quite the contrary. Now we LIVE the gospel, not receive it. It is only our ego-centric view that compels us to insist that the gospel is for me/us. This preoccupation with receiving the good news is only true if you are consciously living in rebellion.
This all makes me wonder where Jesus would go if he suddenly showed up in America? Would he show up at your doorstep? (And would I let him in?) Or at church? Or at a bar? Perhaps in a frame shack where the illegals live. Makes me wonder. It also makes me wonder if he would try to guess where I am.....
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
It is like...
Chapter 4 brings us a string of stories that are an attempt to describe the kingdom of God. Simple little everyday stories that point to the bigger story. In our reductionist, logic-driven culture we do not respond well to these types of stories. We want the answer and we want it now. But Jesus prefers to tell stories in a way that a moment later or a day later or a decade later, we have the "aha" moment. So that is what he meant.
So how does a hidden light, a planted seed, and the smallest seed illustrate the kingdom of God? What do these separate and unrelated events have to do with each other. if anything?
One common these seems to be one of perceived insignificance. The lamp is hidden, the seed is buried and forgotten, and the mustard is tiny, barely visible. So how does the kingdom look like these? Is this simply a historical relevance? Does this portion only have to do with the time and place of Jesus? Does this perception of "smallness" have any relevance today?
And what of the idea that the growth takes place, but those around it don't know how it happens, only that it does happen. How is the kingdom explained by the revelation of things that were intended to be hidden? The plant grows of its own accord and no one knows how that happens. We only see the results, the revelation? The mustard seed is so tiny, but grows so large that it is the nesting place in the garden. The kingdom is explained somehow with revelation.
The final scope of this is the expansion of light and plant and flowering tree. From tiny to large, from hidden to revealed, from insignificance to majesty. How does all this explain the kingdom?
God, show us the kingdom as you see it. We know better than to ask for understanding, we are asking for perception, to see.
Don
So how does a hidden light, a planted seed, and the smallest seed illustrate the kingdom of God? What do these separate and unrelated events have to do with each other. if anything?
One common these seems to be one of perceived insignificance. The lamp is hidden, the seed is buried and forgotten, and the mustard is tiny, barely visible. So how does the kingdom look like these? Is this simply a historical relevance? Does this portion only have to do with the time and place of Jesus? Does this perception of "smallness" have any relevance today?
And what of the idea that the growth takes place, but those around it don't know how it happens, only that it does happen. How is the kingdom explained by the revelation of things that were intended to be hidden? The plant grows of its own accord and no one knows how that happens. We only see the results, the revelation? The mustard seed is so tiny, but grows so large that it is the nesting place in the garden. The kingdom is explained somehow with revelation.
The final scope of this is the expansion of light and plant and flowering tree. From tiny to large, from hidden to revealed, from insignificance to majesty. How does all this explain the kingdom?
God, show us the kingdom as you see it. We know better than to ask for understanding, we are asking for perception, to see.
Don
Friday, March 30, 2012
Either Fer Me or Agin Me
Interesting story we find with Jesus this time around. His mission has shifted into high gear, he is followed wherever he goes, the crowds have discovered him, the authorities are watching him. In the midst of all this chaos we see the beginning of the argument against him. The religious leaders will accuse him directly, his family will hint at it. In their eyes, Jesus is clearly not managing his life well. His family claims "He is out of his mind." The teachers of the law say, "He is possessed by Beelzebul!" Jesus is not playing by the same rules as everyone else and he must be stopped.
There are at least two things that strike me here about this moment.
First of all, when someone truly embraces the leading of the Spirit, they act in ways we are not accustomed to. And it frightens us. It is easier to assign evil and mysterious motives than it is to step back and wonder if they have found a different level of understanding. In my opinion this is our primary fear of the "pentecostal" crowd. Our frame of reference is experiential, not faith. We have never had it happen to us so we don't believe it. So when we come across these events, we tend to "demonize" those who are involved. Reading this story makes me realize how dangerous that is. Jesus rightly points out that you can't accuse him of being possessed when the very evidence of his mission is the destruction of the demons in which he is supposed to in league.
Secondly, the teachers of the law react by accusing him of the greatest sin they could think of. The argument Jesus presents is indisputable. They can't have it both ways. If he is destroying demons, then he is not one of them. If he is promoting the good will of God, then he has to be a part of His plan. But isn't this just like all of us? We jump at the most contemptible accusation we can come up with, even in the face of all the evidence? Theirs was not a carefully considered accusation, it was a reaction. Haven't we all seen this?
God, help us to understand the weakness of our nature in the temptation to accuse without discernment.
There are at least two things that strike me here about this moment.
First of all, when someone truly embraces the leading of the Spirit, they act in ways we are not accustomed to. And it frightens us. It is easier to assign evil and mysterious motives than it is to step back and wonder if they have found a different level of understanding. In my opinion this is our primary fear of the "pentecostal" crowd. Our frame of reference is experiential, not faith. We have never had it happen to us so we don't believe it. So when we come across these events, we tend to "demonize" those who are involved. Reading this story makes me realize how dangerous that is. Jesus rightly points out that you can't accuse him of being possessed when the very evidence of his mission is the destruction of the demons in which he is supposed to in league.
Secondly, the teachers of the law react by accusing him of the greatest sin they could think of. The argument Jesus presents is indisputable. They can't have it both ways. If he is destroying demons, then he is not one of them. If he is promoting the good will of God, then he has to be a part of His plan. But isn't this just like all of us? We jump at the most contemptible accusation we can come up with, even in the face of all the evidence? Theirs was not a carefully considered accusation, it was a reaction. Haven't we all seen this?
God, help us to understand the weakness of our nature in the temptation to accuse without discernment.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
What is True Religion?
There are two stories this week that illustrate similar points about the meaning and purpose of "sabbath." Both have enormous cultural tones and both pull back the curtain on what the mission truly is for the rabbi. We catch the troupe in a breach of sabbath etiquette, and we see the rabbi having to choose tradition or mission.
This would all be a little bothersome except for the fact that it has continued to crop for all these intervening centuries.
When I was a young man in high school my dad ran the bus ministry at a church in Abilene. He recruited guys to help him find serviceable school buses, found another guy who would paint them an electric blue and stencil the name of the church on the side, and recruited high school and college kids to ride the buses and chaperon the kids through Sunday morning and Wednesday night church. He was the unstoppable force in this ministry. At one time there were more than half dozen buses, and well over 150 kids picked up every Sunday morning and Wednesday night.
These kids were from the poorest sections of Abilene. They were ragged and smelly and dirty. They cussed like sailors, they would steal whatever was not nailed down, and at some point we had real problems with riots on the buses and on the routes. Remember, this was the early 70's and racial tension was at an all-time high.
But there were victories. Some of the kids were cleaned up and had a shot at a decent life. Time and again my dad to this day will point out someone who is obviously doing fine and remark, "He rode our buses" My dad never says it with pride, just a statement that the ministry worked.
One Sunday morning there was the normal high activity around the worship service. The worship leaders and elders all wanted to stay on schedule, to get to the next thing. In the midst of this whirlwind, one of the "bus kids" wanted to be baptised. A quick decision was made to do it after the second service, so the normal flow of the different assembly times and class times would not be interrupted. My dad pinned one of the elders to the wall and told him plainly that if that had been a "member's child" they would have stopped down the service and had the baptism. They chose poorly. My dad, who is not by nature confrontational, rightly called their hand on it.
Man or Sabbath? Good or evil? Mission or maintenance?
We have a lot to talk about.
Lord, give us the ability to discern the righteous activity over the traditional activity. Give us strength to speak up when organization injures the individual. Keep us in your Word. Amen
Don
This would all be a little bothersome except for the fact that it has continued to crop for all these intervening centuries.
When I was a young man in high school my dad ran the bus ministry at a church in Abilene. He recruited guys to help him find serviceable school buses, found another guy who would paint them an electric blue and stencil the name of the church on the side, and recruited high school and college kids to ride the buses and chaperon the kids through Sunday morning and Wednesday night church. He was the unstoppable force in this ministry. At one time there were more than half dozen buses, and well over 150 kids picked up every Sunday morning and Wednesday night.
These kids were from the poorest sections of Abilene. They were ragged and smelly and dirty. They cussed like sailors, they would steal whatever was not nailed down, and at some point we had real problems with riots on the buses and on the routes. Remember, this was the early 70's and racial tension was at an all-time high.
But there were victories. Some of the kids were cleaned up and had a shot at a decent life. Time and again my dad to this day will point out someone who is obviously doing fine and remark, "He rode our buses" My dad never says it with pride, just a statement that the ministry worked.
One Sunday morning there was the normal high activity around the worship service. The worship leaders and elders all wanted to stay on schedule, to get to the next thing. In the midst of this whirlwind, one of the "bus kids" wanted to be baptised. A quick decision was made to do it after the second service, so the normal flow of the different assembly times and class times would not be interrupted. My dad pinned one of the elders to the wall and told him plainly that if that had been a "member's child" they would have stopped down the service and had the baptism. They chose poorly. My dad, who is not by nature confrontational, rightly called their hand on it.
Man or Sabbath? Good or evil? Mission or maintenance?
We have a lot to talk about.
Lord, give us the ability to discern the righteous activity over the traditional activity. Give us strength to speak up when organization injures the individual. Keep us in your Word. Amen
Don
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Right vs Proper
This story has everything.
Big crowds, small room.
4 friends who will rip off a roof to get their buddy some help.
Doing the right thing vs the proper thing.
Priorities: Release from sin or release from handicap?
Religious organizational approach vs moral and compassionate healing.
For the first time we see a confrontation with the religious leaders. Jesus has to decide which is more important, pleasing the status quo or forging ahead with his mission.
This is the first mention of the religious leaders and the first time casting out demons is omitted. Hmm.
I have prompted this week to also mention that there seems to be connection between the healing and the casting out of demons. Can there be some symbolism that I haven't seen before? Can the removal of an evil spirit, the breaking of a fever, the healing of leprosy, and now the restoration from being paralyzed have a deeper spiritual meaning?
God, open us up to real world of spiritual battle, train us to hear your clarion call, to respond with spiritual weapons you have provided.
Big crowds, small room.
4 friends who will rip off a roof to get their buddy some help.
Doing the right thing vs the proper thing.
Priorities: Release from sin or release from handicap?
Religious organizational approach vs moral and compassionate healing.
For the first time we see a confrontation with the religious leaders. Jesus has to decide which is more important, pleasing the status quo or forging ahead with his mission.
This is the first mention of the religious leaders and the first time casting out demons is omitted. Hmm.
I have prompted this week to also mention that there seems to be connection between the healing and the casting out of demons. Can there be some symbolism that I haven't seen before? Can the removal of an evil spirit, the breaking of a fever, the healing of leprosy, and now the restoration from being paralyzed have a deeper spiritual meaning?
God, open us up to real world of spiritual battle, train us to hear your clarion call, to respond with spiritual weapons you have provided.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Reflect and Re-Engage
As I read through this text and then meditated on the meaning of the story, it occured to me that Jesus knew the value of spending time in God's presence, or as a man once said, "Wasting time with God"
The ministry had already been launched. He had already engaged the enemy, he had already articulated his message, he had already exercised the power that would drive his ministry. Yet in the midst of mission, he reconnected to the power source, the purpose of his mission was reviewed and reflected upon and re-centered. We don't get a lot of stories about this discipline, but we get glimpses. I will tell you from my journey over the last 10 years or so that when I ignore the disciplines of silence and solitude I get distracted and lose my focus. We get an early read from Jesus, that while "totally God" and "totally man" he never forgot to reconnect through the inner disciplines of prayer, silence, solitude, meditation, and study.
Then there is the leper. I think these stories are related. He responds with "indignant" An odd word for the response. I will do some word study before Sunday and see where it leads. But on the surface if you come out of a time of worship with God and see disease that both alienated physically as well as socially, doesn't it make sense that Jesus would be offended? Wouldn't the leprosy be viewed as the work of the evil one? Isn't this just what the evil one wants to do? Create a world where we are alienated and cast out?
Do we have people today, that given their circumstances we should respond with indignance? Can we look around and find the modern equivalence of leprosy?
God, open our eyes to current methods of the evil one. Make us aware of his purposes and manifestations.
Amen
The ministry had already been launched. He had already engaged the enemy, he had already articulated his message, he had already exercised the power that would drive his ministry. Yet in the midst of mission, he reconnected to the power source, the purpose of his mission was reviewed and reflected upon and re-centered. We don't get a lot of stories about this discipline, but we get glimpses. I will tell you from my journey over the last 10 years or so that when I ignore the disciplines of silence and solitude I get distracted and lose my focus. We get an early read from Jesus, that while "totally God" and "totally man" he never forgot to reconnect through the inner disciplines of prayer, silence, solitude, meditation, and study.
Then there is the leper. I think these stories are related. He responds with "indignant" An odd word for the response. I will do some word study before Sunday and see where it leads. But on the surface if you come out of a time of worship with God and see disease that both alienated physically as well as socially, doesn't it make sense that Jesus would be offended? Wouldn't the leprosy be viewed as the work of the evil one? Isn't this just what the evil one wants to do? Create a world where we are alienated and cast out?
Do we have people today, that given their circumstances we should respond with indignance? Can we look around and find the modern equivalence of leprosy?
God, open our eyes to current methods of the evil one. Make us aware of his purposes and manifestations.
Amen
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
The Winds of War
As I read over the rest of chapter one, it occurred to me that the author was trying to set a tone. He was wanting to make a point, but didn't want to just come out and say it. Perhaps the point was so well ingrained in his own experience that he didn't feel the need to articulate it. We will probably never know.
But two big issues seem to be setting up for a showdown in this story.
First was his teaching. We don't really know what the author meant by "teaching with authority" It could be any number of things. Perhaps he spoke with certainty. We know from our own experiences that a group can get bogged down over the details and miss the big picture. I suspect he spoke to core truths and the application of those truths in a such a way that the people in the synagogue and the river's edge all felt that God was speaking to them. It is very refreshing, and rare when a preacher can stick to the core truth and explain it in a way that it can applied. Jesus must have had a great deal of that simplistic theology that we all crave.
Secondly, he seems to have an axe to grind with the demons. Three times in the first chapter it is either told in a direct way or mentioned that he was casting out demons. Casting to them to where I don't know, but they were being dealt with in a manner that apparently the people had not seen before.
Here is my point. The teaching of Jesus was not a script for sin-management, it was a battle cry to a spiritual war. Jesus fully understood that his mission would come into conflict with the one-who-destroys. Do you wonder why it says that Jesus was "indignant" that the leper came to him? It was because the leper represented the decay of the spiritual forces on the other side.
The early teaching of Jesus is the opening salvo from the side of righteousness that had been silent for a very long time.
God, help us see the conflict for what it is, good vs. evil, spiritual vs. temporal. Open our eyes and lead us into the fray.
Don
But two big issues seem to be setting up for a showdown in this story.
First was his teaching. We don't really know what the author meant by "teaching with authority" It could be any number of things. Perhaps he spoke with certainty. We know from our own experiences that a group can get bogged down over the details and miss the big picture. I suspect he spoke to core truths and the application of those truths in a such a way that the people in the synagogue and the river's edge all felt that God was speaking to them. It is very refreshing, and rare when a preacher can stick to the core truth and explain it in a way that it can applied. Jesus must have had a great deal of that simplistic theology that we all crave.
Secondly, he seems to have an axe to grind with the demons. Three times in the first chapter it is either told in a direct way or mentioned that he was casting out demons. Casting to them to where I don't know, but they were being dealt with in a manner that apparently the people had not seen before.
Here is my point. The teaching of Jesus was not a script for sin-management, it was a battle cry to a spiritual war. Jesus fully understood that his mission would come into conflict with the one-who-destroys. Do you wonder why it says that Jesus was "indignant" that the leper came to him? It was because the leper represented the decay of the spiritual forces on the other side.
The early teaching of Jesus is the opening salvo from the side of righteousness that had been silent for a very long time.
God, help us see the conflict for what it is, good vs. evil, spiritual vs. temporal. Open our eyes and lead us into the fray.
Don
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)