Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. – Ephesians 5:21

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 31, 2015): Ephesians 5

Quiz time. Which popular 70’s sitcom is thought to be the first show to have contained the sound of a toilet flushing? Following its first appearance, the flushing toilet actually became a running gag on the show. The answer: All in the Family. I can still hear the toilet flush and then Archie come bounding down the stairs. “All in the Family” was a funny show, but it was also an important show. It was the first sitcom to take on issues that the society of that day was struggling with, but also felt were incompatible with a comedic format. “All in the Family” took a swing at issues such as racism, rape, the Vietnam War, breast cancer, miscarriage, homosexuality – and, of course, the flushing toilet. The comedy really changed the way we thought as a society, and it did it for the better.

But the show also taught us about the idea of submission. We almost hated Edith for the way that she would allow Archie to push her around. Archie would order her like a slave, call her dingbat, and when she did want to speak, often with a message that we really needed to hear, Archie would tell Edith to stifle. It was almost too much, even for that day and that age. Yet, Edith rose above all of that. And according to Paul, Edith got it right. In fact, if you are married and you want to make the most out of your marriage, watch “All in the Family” and pay close attention to Edith – while ignoring Archie, who was the only real dingbat on the sitcom.

Submission is a ten letter word. Obvious, I know. But it is a ten letter word that we just don’t like. In Contemporary culture there are two ten letter words that we treat as if they were swear words. And submission is one of them – and maybe the preeminent one. (If you are curious about the other one, it is discipline – we aren’t much of a fan about that word either.) But we see no reason why we should ever be submissive to anyone. After all, we have rights and we deserve respect. We are the talented ones – if there is anyone who should be submissive, it is others to us. All of this revealing that we would make very good Archie’s.

The problem is that we connect the idea of submission with the idea of being talented or worthy of respect, but those two concepts are totally unrelated. Submission is a military word that carries the meaning of being one of lesser rank. There is absolutely no doubt that a private fighting on the front line could be more talented and have a higher intellectual ability then one of the general’s guiding the battle from behind. But that private, as talented as he is, exists in a chain of command – and he is submissive to the less talented general through that chain of command. And it is quite possible that if the private learns the lesson of submission, he will rise through the ranks and one day share the rank of General with some other less talented soldiers. But if he doesn’t learn the lesson, he will remain exactly where he is – a private – until the day that he washes out of army.

This is the image that Paul wants us to understand. Submit to one another does not mean that they are smarter or more talented than we are; it means that we have learned the military lesson. And really, that we are willing to recognized Christ in each other. The unfortunate truth of Archie Bunker is that because of the way that he behaved, he never really realized the worth of this jewel to which he was married.

But Edith got it. It didn’t matter what was happening around her, she showed how much she valued this oaf who was ordering her around through her submission. Could you imagine how great this television marriage would have been if Archie could have mirrored Edith. It was the scene that we never saw on the show. Archie coming through the door, home at last from work. Edith racing in from the kitchen, coming through that swinging door with supper in her hands. And at this point Archie races to her side and moves into the kitchen wanting nothing more than to take some of this weight off of the shoulders of his bride. That would have been a beautiful picture of mutual submission.

And it is a picture of what the church is supposed to look like. We are to submit to each other, racing to value others more than ourselves, not because the other is smarter than we are, or more likely in our society because they are richer than we are, but because we are following the example that has been set down before us by Jesus Christ.

Who, being in very nature God,
    did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
    by taking the very nature of a servant,
    being made in human likeness.
 And being found in appearance as a man,
    he humbled himself
    by becoming obedient to death—
        even death on a cross. – Philippians 2:6-8  

And through our submission, we begin to understand the Christian Faith, and show that someday we will be read for a promotion.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Ephesians 6

Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. – Ephesians 4:2

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 30, 2015): Ephesians 4

Theologian William Barclay once commented that “if God had been a man, he would long since have wiped out the world for all its disobedience!” I think we understand that. I know we are just joking – kind of – but how often do you hear someone say they would like to hit someone in the head with a two by four. Whenever someone crosses us, they are dead to us. And, if I am honest, I have to admit that I have met some of the most unforgiving people inside the Christian Church. If this is the way we react when we don’t get our own way, what chance would we have with an all-powerful being who is continually ignored or abused by the human race? Barclay is right, if God reacted like a man, we would have been gone a long time ago.

So why are we still here? It isn’t that God hasn’t tried. In the story of Noah (Genesis 6-9), the central plot of the story is that God meets with Noah and informs him that he has had it with the human race. And so he proposes to Noah that Noah should build an Ark and take animals and his family inside the ark, at which point God would deal with the human race as they deserved – he would destroy them with a flood. And so, Noah builds an Ark

In Genesis 18, God once again is frustrated with the way that the people of the earth are acting. In this case God steps down out of heaven and has a meeting with Abraham. God proposes that he will destroy the offending cities, Sodom and Gomorrah, and likely a few other unnamed cities which had been built by the Dead Sea, with fire. Abraham could have done what Noah did, and just acquiesce to God. But instead Abraham finds the courage to argue with God. What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? God relents, if he finds fifty righteous people he will not destroy the cities. So Abraham continues, what about forty, thirty, twenty, or even ten? And God commits to Abraham that if he can find ten righteous people he will not destroy the cities. But God cannot even find ten righteous people, and so the cities are destroyed by the fire of God.

In Exodus 32, the people of Israel build a Golden Calf to worship instead of God, and once again the anger of God burns against the people of the earth. This time God argues with Moses, step aside and let me destroy this stiff-necked people of Israel and I will raise up a new nation starting with your descendants. Moses could have followed the actions of Noah and simply step aside, or of Abraham and argue with God over the number of bad apples it takes to destroy the batch. But, this time, Moses refuses to step aside. He stands up to God and begs God not to do such a thing. He begs for the life of his people, the people of Israel. And I often wonder, is this just possibly the reaction that God was hoping for from Abraham and from Noah. Is it just a little possible that God hoped that the ones who know him the best would be willing to stand up for the people of the earth, even when the sin and the error of the people is more than obvious? Does Moses in this passage, more than either Abraham and Noah, reflect the true desires of our creator God?

Paul would seem to want to argue that. He instructs the Ephesian Church to “be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love.” These would appear to be the characteristics of a God who has, for some reason, allowed his rebellious creation to live as long as he has. And it follows that unless we can find these godly characteristics, this world may not last for much longer. The real weapon of mass destruction that threatens this planet on a daily basis is just simple selfishness.

But what may be even more critical is that the Christian Church needs desperately to find these characteristics. We have a too well-earned reputation for shooting our own wounded. What we need is to learn to react to the negatives inside the church with love – to welcome those who may believe differently from us into our midst with gentle humility, recognizing the very image of God that they bear on their souls. Only then will it be possible to say that Church has begun to reflect the character of the God we profess to serve. Only then will we truly be fulfilling our purpose on the earth.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Ephesians 5

For this reason I kneel before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name. – Ephesians 3:14-15

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 29, 2015): Ephesians 3



Statue removed in King, North Carolina

The city of King, North Carolina, earlier this month removed a statue from a war memorial in a public park owned by the city. The city was being sued over the subject matter of the statue, an image which depicted a soldier kneeling in front of a small cross, a cross that looks like it has been placed as a marker at the grave of a fellow soldier. The basis of the lawsuit, which was being pursued by an Afghanistan Veteran and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, was that the statue promoted Christianity and therefore could not be placed in a park that is paid for by the public purse. I have to admit that as I looked at the statue, I missed the problem. I understand that there is a cross and a man kneeling in front of it, but the reality is that there are crosses similar to the one depicted in the statue that are placed on soldiers graves all over the world. And the man may have been praying, but he could just as likely have been remembering the life of a friend who is buried beneath that cross. The lawsuit seems to be a reach, but the city was scared enough of the lawsuit to vote to remove the offending statue – as well as a Christian Flag that flew over the park – and to give the group, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the sum of $500,000 to pay for some of their legal costs. And I still don’t understand. A statue of Jesus on the cross, maybe, but a patriotic statue of a soldier kneeling at the grave of a fellow soldier …?

And I wonder if it is this unfamiliar position of kneeling that is offensive. We just don’t do it much in contemporary society. Even within the Christian Church we don’t kneel much anymore. In a world where each person feels entitled, we have lost the necessity of kneeling. Once upon a time, in a society that was layered with cultural expectation, it was common to kneel in front of someone who was of a higher class than you. And in this act of kneeling, you actually made yourself vulnerable to the one you were kneeling in front of – in the days when fighting was done with a sword, kneeling was a lousy position from which to start the fight, And when the one who kneeled also bowed their head, they made their neck vulnerable to the sword of the one who stood over them. This act indicated both respect as well as trust.

Judaism didn’t demand kneeling as a prayer position. There are examples of Jews kneeling in prayer, but for the Jews standing before their God was the more prevalent prayer position. But Paul decides to kneel. And in doing so he recognizes the place that his God occupies in his life. As far as Paul is concerned, this God that he serves is not just the God of Jews, but the God of everyone and everything - this is the Father of Creation - and so Paul kneels. Not everybody had to agree with him, but that wouldn’t stop him from kneeling – and giving the respect and trust that Paul believed belonged to his God.

No matter what your religious background might be, the act of giving respect should never be something that we are ashamed of doing. And suing over a statue that depicts a soldier giving respect to a fallen comrade, even if he was praying, still does not make sense to me.

And I have to admit that as the NFC Championship game closed a couple of weeks ago, the image that was left in my memory was not the amazing Russell Wilson to Jermaine Kearse pass that ended overtime, and it was not Marshawn Lynch’s tradition of only shaking hands with his fellow players after a great touchdown run (which I admit that I love.) But the image that was left with me was of the players kneeling at center field, Russell Wilson kneeling with them with tears streaming down his face, together acknowledging that there was someone else that deserved an expression of their respect – no matter whether they won, or lost. It is a celebration that never gets old – and one that I hope we will never consider making against the law.    

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Ephesians 4

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – Ephesians 2:8

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 28, 2015): Ephesians 2

Steven Hawking says that he used to believe in a unified theory, or a theory of everything. The unified theory has long been the “Holy Grail” among physics researchers, one theory that describes, well, everything. And Hawking was among the many researchers trying to puzzle out the goal. But we have not found the theory, and some researchers, and Hawking now stands among them, believe that a unified theory is impossible. And not only is it impossible, but if one is found it would be incomplete. Some even argue that there is a weakness in the idea of a single theory. A single theory would also be less predictive of results, making the theory useless even if one did exist. And yet the search continues.

James Burton Coffman, a pastor who served within the “Churches of Christ,” has argued in his writings about what he calls the “Reformation heresy,” contained within the Latin Reformation phrase “solo gratia, sola fide, soli Deo gloria (by grace alone, through faith alone, to God alone be glory)." Coffman argues that the Reformed Statement is ridiculous on its face because they have tied salvation to too many horses. Apparently Coffman’s issue is with the word alone, used twice with the Reformed statement, and he questions how anyone could be saved through faith alone, and by grace alone – and he wants to know which is it, faith alone or grace alone? Coffman argues that to combine the two (faith and grace) is like saying that I am married to Nelda alone – and I am married to Joanne alone. The statement doesn’t make any sense, I am married to one or the other alone – I can’t be married to both and still apply the word “alone.” (For those of you wondering, in my case the answer is Nelda alone– and I don’t know who Joanne might be.) According to Coffman, a unified theory or a single cause in spirituality makes as much sense as a single theory does in the area of physics.

And while I may not share Coffman’s passion on the issue, I do understand where he is coming from. This chasing after, or reducing everything to the “one,” might be a frailty of the human condition, whether we are talking about a unified theory in physics or the single cause of salvation within Christianity – but it may also reveal an inherent weakness. I have long believed that tracts that describe the “Four Spiritual Laws” are in error. At best, they are a simplistic description that is so simple that they may have the tendency to lead us into heresy. In trying to be simple, we have removed the truth. And this removal of truth might be the end result of any attempt to chase after a unified theory.

So we are left with this dance between faith, grace – and really works, although Paul is extremely clear that works cannot be a basis of salvation, but that does not mean that works should not be a part of our lives. It might be that we have to understand that the idea of alone – unless it is being applied to God – has no place in our spirituality. What we are left with is really a dance, and a dance is always more fun if you have others around to dance with.

With regard to our salvation, the dance might look like this. Grace takes the lead, there is absolutely no way that any of us can earn our salvation, God gives it to us of his own free will. To believe that our salvation is something we can do on our own would be comparable to my almost three year-old granddaughter, Emilina, deciding that she doesn’t need her Mom and Dad anymore and that she is moving out. It is impossible. Next, faith steps in and does the twirl of the dance. Faith is an acceptance on our part to accept what God has done on our behalf. Faith is us admitting that we understand that we need you and we have no plans to run away. Like a child trusting that Mom and Dad will do what is necessary to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table, faith states its trust in the grace that has been offered. And when grace and faith move together, the dance that is left we call works. Works can’t go first – at least not with regard to our salvation, it needs both faith and grace, but without works the dancers stand motionless on the floor – and the music has stopped. Whenever grace and faith are working in our lives, something good is going to happen. We will fight for the equality of the human race, we will be part of movements designed to restore human rights, we will take care of the poor, we will give strength to the lonely – the dance will continue.

But it is never “alone.” Are you taking part in the dance?     

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Ephesians 3

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love … - Ephesians 1:4

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 27, 2015): Ephesians 1

When we choose, we are making a complex group of decisions between two things in an effort to discern which it is that is best. For instance, if it is a political vote that is placed before us, then there are a number of considerations that must be evaluated. Maybe the first, and the scariest, of our consideration is to which political party that we feel that we owe allegiance. N. T. Wright argues that this is maybe just an American concern, that simply by a declaration of whether a person self identifies as either a Democrat or a Republican can define the way that a person will vote on a range of issues. According to Wright, the rest of the world simply does not react that way. Maybe it is just a way to simplify our decision making. But we also evaluate things on the basis of the economic impact that the decision will make on our lives. It centers sometimes on our view of ecology. Decisions are made according to our social agenda – and our religious agenda. And when we have finally chosen the one, we act and we hope.

I believe that we have often misread these words of Paul as he speaks about choosing us “before the creation of the world.” Too often the Christian belief seems to echo the false understanding of the Judaism, this belief in a dichotomy, a choice; and on one side stands the ones that God has chosen, and on the other those he has not. In Judaism this dichotomy is reflected in the idea of Jews (the chosen ones) and Gentiles (the unchosen ones). Lost in this dichotomy seems to be the words of God to Abraham, the first of the Jewish Patriarchs after the flood. And God said to Abraham that “all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” (Genesis 12:3). God chose the world, all of creation, to receive his blessing – and then he chose Abraham and his descendants to be the vessel by which God would bless the nations. In the same way, some believe that only some of us bear the mark of God, but the reality of Abraham has never changed. The Christian Church is simply to be the vessel chosen, alongside of the Jews, by which the world will be blessed.

We need to hear the words of Paul and understand that God has chosen us, before the creation of the world, in the very act of creation. He chose to place something of himself in this universe – and to call that something good. If he had not chosen us, he would have never created the world in the first place. But the choice is not between two groups of people; this cannot be about a choice between the Jews and the Gentiles, and it also cannot be about the predestination of some people to heaven and others to hell. Before the creation of the world, God chose creation over whatever the alternatives might have been. And God saw everything that he had created and called it good. And God blessed what it was that he had created. He gave the task of taking this blessing to the world first to the Jews (and they have still been given this task.) Then he added the Christian Church to this task. But it might be that in reality the whole race of humans have been chosen, before the creation of the world, to care for the world that God so loves.        

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Ephesians 2         

… no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord. – Philemon 1:16

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 26, 2015): Philemon 1

We are familiar with these lines from the American Declaration of Independence - We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness … We are familiar with the words, but if we are really honest we have to admit that they don’t really ring true. We live in a world that has been continually marred by class wars; that has seen separation on the basis of cultural ideals and beliefs. India has long been ruled by a caste system, Judaism divides the world into two populations – the Jews and the Gentiles (non-Jews) - and only one population is considered to be favored by God. As much as we want to deny it, slavery still exists in our world. In many areas of the world, the role of women is probably best described as being that of second class citizens (even in my end of the world that struggle for the equality of women is still being fought.) The United States right now is struggling through race issues. And the list could go on – exactly what is it about the idea that all men are created equal that we find to be so self-evident.

But these aren’t the original words. The original document, before it was changed by a committee, was written by Thomas Jefferson and he chose these words for the opening of the line - We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable; that all men are created equal and independent … I have to admit that I think that I like the original phrase better. It is not that the truth of equality is self-evident, but rather that it is sacred and undeniable.

And that is the import of Paul’s words. It is not that Paul is telling Philemon to free his slave. But he is saying that his relationship with his slave has changed. Onesimus used to be simply a slave – a servant. But now he is a brother, and maybe even more importantly, he is a fellow man. No longer could Onesimus simply be property – he was an individual. And while Paul was not saying that Philemon had to free Onesimus, the reality was that the change in attitude will eventually necessitate the end of slavery – even if we are still waiting for that day to come. It is not that the idea of the equality of the human race is self-evident, but Paul’s message to the slave owner Philemon is that the idea of the equality of the human race is sacred, and because it is sacred is must also be undeniable.

The church must hold this idea of equality to be true. Our nature of the Christian community is based on this idea. Even in the first century, Paul found an equality between himself, a highly educated theologian, Philemon, a rich slave owner, and a run-away slave named Onesimus. The sacred and undeniable truth that Paul had come to be sure of is that they were all equal – and they were brothers. Wherever we find division, the church needs to be the voice that insists that we are all equal, every person who walks this planet with us is a brother or a sister. This is the sacred truth that we must know.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Ephesians 1

After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea. – Colossians 4:16

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 25, 2015): Colossians 4

Ideas are important, but only if they connect with others. And sometimes the connecting is the problem. In ancient times, the transfer of an idea was done basically by word of mouth. A teacher would tell his colleagues and his students, and from there they would be told to other interested parties, and, if the idea had traction, then the idea would slowly reach out into the people of the community. But there were probably a number of important ideas that were lost – they just didn’t have traction. Sometimes ideas were written down in book – or a letter. But even then, someone had to read it – and agree that the ideas it contained were important.

This letter to the Colossians is important because of the ideas it contains, but it also tells us how Pauline ideas travelled through the early Christian world. It is extremely unlikely that Paul knew he was writing a Christian version of the Bible. He probably would not have even understood the need, after all, Paul believed that Jesus was on his way back soon. But because of that, Paul needed to keep in touch with the churches and let them know what it was that he was thinking. And so he wrote letters, and those letters were passed around to various churches. Soon, they started to make copies of them. Small bundles of Pauline letters began to circulate – and the ideas had traction. And so these letters, handed from church to church, began to shape the young Christian movement. The critics have called this movement Paulianity because it was Paul’s letters that were the root cause of the change, but supporters just recognize the great practical theologian that the early church had in Paul of Tarsus.

So letters were written and then shared throughout the known world. Ideas were transferred from city to city defining this Christian faith and how it would interact with the world. The letters were important. Paul wrote to churches, and to individuals. He encouraged them to keep the faith and finish the race. It is likely that the thirteen letters that we have in our Bibles are just a fraction of the letters that Paul wrote. Many were lost. Among the ones that we believe were lost are two more letters to the Corinthian church, often labeled as first and third Corinthians (making the two existing letters to the Corinthian Church really second and fourth Corinthians), at least one more letter to the Ephesians and the letter to the Laodicean Church mentioned here, but there are probably many more.

Some experts have speculated that the lost Laodicean letter may have been the letter that we know of as Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, but many disagree. While the cities exist in the same area, the Ephesian letter that we have was written close to the same time as the Colossian letter, and so they argue that Paul’s mention of a Laodicean letter seems to have been written at an earlier date.

But, whether we have the letters or not, the ideas contained in them, shared among people, changed the world. And those ideas are still bringing change to our world.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Philemon 1

Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters … - Colossians 3:23

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 24, 2015): Colossians 3

As a teen, I worked in a fast food restaurant. It was my first job and I remember thinking to myself as I was working those first few shifts that this was somehow qualitatively different from any place I had ever been before. These people were paying me real money to do the job that I was doing. And if I wanted the money, I needed to respect that. This particular restaurant was managed by hired managers, although it wasn’t a company store – a store owned directly by the franchise. The owners just didn’t live in the city in which I lived (actually, they didn’t even live in the country in which I lived.) And so we didn’t see much of the ones who were really paying the bills; we saw and dealt with the hired managers. But I remember the first day that I was on the floor when one of the owners showed. Actually, he was the son of the owner who probably only had shares in the company by virtue of his relationship with his dad. And when he walked into the restaurant, he took control. He was impeccably dressed, with rings on his fingers and even furs for him and his wife to wear in our northern climate (although I don’t remember it being particularly cold that day). And he looked really out of place with the rest of the clientele that we served. I mean, this was not a fancy restaurant, it was fast food. And it seemed that from the first moment that he entered the store, everyone was nervous. This guy was one of the people who seem to never be happy with anything. Whatever it was that we were doing, it just was not good enough. And when he finally left the restaurant and got into his brand new luxury car and drove away, it felt like even the building breathed a sigh of relief.

A few weeks later my manager came up to me and tapped me on the shoulder and told me that the owner was in the building. Not the son who had showed up a few weeks earlier, but the owner, the big guy, the one who seemed to hold the fate of the world in his hands. My eyes immediately went to the front of the restaurant, searching the faces, trying to identify the one with all the power, but I couldn’t see anyone that would meet my expectations of the one who would be the father of the son that I had met a few weeks earlier. I looked back at my manager and she smiled, and reading my question she pointed to a guy who was placing an order at one of the tills up front. He was an older gentlemen, and he wore a plaid button up shirt and a pair blue jeans. When he stepped away from the till, I would see that his blue jeans ended with a pair of beat-up sneakers (comfortable shoes he called them.) He was leaning on the counter and telling the person taking his order a joke, but he was struggling getting through the joke without laughing himself. No one seemed nervous, in fact, everyone rather gravitated toward him. He shook hands and laughed – and in a mysterious way he fit in with the rest of the store. If I had not been told that this was the multi-millionaire who owned the place, I would never have known. On the outside, there was just nothing special about him. He was extremely comfortable in his own skin and seemed to have no reason to want to prove anything about himself. It seemed almost impossible that this was the father of the impeccably dressed snob who everyone had been afraid of only weeks earlier.

Every time I read this passage, this the image that comes to mind. When you work, work as if it is God that you are working for – because that is the truth. But the problem is that you may not recognize him. Unlike earthly masters who want you to know who they are, God fits in. He isn’t terribly concerned with the way he looks to us. If he was, I think the Bible would read a lot differently. He is God, the creator of everything, so he really has nothing to prove. You may not notice him when you are working at the job site – but he is there. And he is noticing what it is that you are doing.

On that day many years ago, the day when the boss walked in, I remember wanting to be around him, wanting to be noticed by him. When his son had left the store earlier, I was happy that he was gone, but not so with dad. I wanted dad to stick around a little longer. It seemed to be very easy to work for him – maybe partially because he seemed so interested in me.

This is our God. He is the ruler of the universe, and yet he came down to us. He put on his blue jeans, his plaid button up shirt and comfortable shoes just so that he could communicate with us. And he is interested in all that we are. And when we do our work for him, it is easy. Because he has taken notice of us in all of our situations – and we have always wanted to be noticed by him.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Colossians 4

When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins … -Colossians 2:13

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 23, 2015): Colossians 2

McDonald’s has recently taken some abuse over an advertising campaign that began during the NFL Divisional playoffs and the Golden Globes earlier this month. The ad features various McDonald’s signs, the space each store has to use beneath the Golden Arches. In the ad some of these spaces are used for congratulating a local couple on 30 years of marriage, and a man celebrating his 95^th birthday. Some of the signs were highly patriotic - “God Bless the U.S.” One of my favorites was the sign where some kind of disaster had destroyed the Arches, but the small sign remains, and it simply read “open.” But maybe the signs that some are most upset over are the signs that highlight national disasters – “We Remember 9 11” and “Boston Strong” – a reference to the bombing in 2013 of the Boston Marathon, an event that killed three people. The commercials say absolutely nothing about the food at McDonalds, but highlight the feel good feeling that McDonalds is hoping will revive it slumping sales. The campaign is built to stress the “loving” portion of the company’s campaign slogan “I’m Loving It.” But, at least for some, the ad appears to represent an incomplete pass.

But maybe what was most surprising was the reaction of the union-backed group “Fight for $15.” The group is advocating for McDonalds and other fast food chains to raise their salaries to at least fifteen dollars and hour. The response of the group was that McDonalds could have saved the money they spent on the commercial and should have given that money to the workers. But that most likely would not benefit the slumping fast food giant or its workers. The heart of advertising is to convince more people to buy the product. More sales increases revenues which allows the company to spend more on things like salaries, so the criticism of “Fight for $15” seems strangely placed. A better line from the group might have been, “McDonalds, remember that the people who do the loving and set up the signs are the very ones we are fighting for. As they love us, don’t you think you should love them? #fightfor$15” But instead the group seemed to have almost purposefully misunderstood the corporate strategy, which could have included them, in favor of a strategy that would seem to only be heading for bankruptcy and mass unemployment – the groups message seems to be “quit advertising and give us your money.” It is sad that they couldn’t have found a way to incorporate their desires into the company’s advertising plan. They might have been amazed at how well that could have worked.

Christianity has long suffered under the same situation. Too often the message of the Christian faith is made into a caricature of what it should be. It seems to be designed for sound bites that can be easily repeated while the key message is ignored. The Christian message is too often converted into hate phrases directed toward the homosexual community, or toward other faith groups, or even toward unwed mothers. Too often God is seen as a harsh tyrant waiting for us to fail so that he can punish us. But the real focus of the Christian Testament isn’t any of these things. The message isn’t even that God wants to make you good, after all, we need to understand that there are a lot of good people living on the earth that are outside of the faith. The simple core Christian message of the Bible is that God wants to make you alive (not good), and he has chosen to accomplish that by forgiving your sin.

And as much as we sometimes might want to deny it, forgiveness is something that we all need – but sometimes we have convinced ourselves is impossible. If you are reading these words, know this – You are Forgiven!  And if that is true, and it is, then nothing else really matters.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Colossians 3

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. – Colossians 1:15

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 22, 2015): Colossians 1

The United States has lamented that it could not send a higher level government official to the Paris march on January 11 in memory of the victims of a terrorist attack on the French Capital earlier this month. In fact, it is rumored that President Obama himself wished that he could have attended, although there was no mention of what it was that had kept him away. The unfortunate political reality is that the President’s handlers probably felt that an Obama presence at the march was too much of a security risk, risking not only the life of the President of the United States, but also the lives of the other world leaders who would dare to link arms and march with the President. Still, the image of the American President standing on foreign soil and marching with instead of dictating to world leaders would have been a powerful picture – and, to be honest, it is a portrait that the world desperately needs to see right now. If it could have only been made a reality.

However, this seems to be the picture that Paul is painting with respect to God. In his opening statement to the Colossians Paul states that Jesus is the very image of the invisible God. The word used for image is a strong word, and it doesn’t mean to merely resemble, like a son can often resemble the looks of the father, Paul uses a word that means image, as the thing that we see when we look in a mirror, or the likeness of a king or queen that is placed on a coin. The idea is that the Son is the very image or reflection of the invisible Father. Where God cannot be seen, the Son can be seen. Where God, because he is invisible, is unknowable, the Son, because he is visible, is knowable. Jesus phrased it this way - If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him – John 14:7. In Jesus, the Father is both known and seen.

But Paul takes a step even further than that and calls Jesus the first born over all creation. And the terminology can seem to be a bit – well, confusing. I have often gone into a tirade over the phrase “the only begotten of the father” – a phrase that is taken from the King James Version of John 3:16. My problem with the phrase is that I think that it makes it sound like Jesus was born – not just to Mary just over 2000 years ago, but to the eternal Father as well. As part of my tirade I often say that my Jesus is not begotten, he is eternally one with the Father – he has the same relation with God the Father as you or I have with our reflection in a mirror – the two are not just similar, they cannot be separated.

Paul’s use of the phrase “first born over all creation” seems to argue against that point. But it really doesn’t. Paul was speaking out of his Pharisaical background. Ancient Rabbis have long called God “the firstborn of the world.” In fact, there is an ancient teaching that says that God began with the act of creation – not that the being we call God did not exist before creation, that being is undoubtedly eternal. But this eternal being did not become God until he began the process of creating the world. It is the same as saying that I have not always been a father, but my children have known me as nothing else, because in the moment that they were born, I was changed. Paul seems to be stressing this very point. If God is “the firstborn of the world” and Jesus is “the first born over all creation,” what exactly is the difference? And Paul’ answer would have been – nothing.

As well as this comparison of Jesus with God, the term first born was also a common way of indicating the reign of the coming Messiah. Speaking of the Messiah, the Psalmist wrote these words –

And I will appoint him to be my firstborn,
    the most exalted of the kings of the earth.
 I will maintain my love to him forever,
    and my covenant with him will never fail.
 I will establish his line forever,
    his throne as long as the heavens endure – Psalm 89:27-29.

In this simple phrase, Paul confirms what it is that as Christians we have always professed to believe – that Jesus is eternally one with the Father, and that he is the Messiah. And in coming into the world God sent the highest representative of heaven possible to march with us – he sent himself.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Colossians 2

When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, “This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, the goddess Justice has not allowed him to live.” – Acts 28:4

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 21, 2015): Acts 28

According to Greek Mythology, Zeus took as his second consort the goddess Themis. Themis was the goddess of divine justice. She is often described as the “good counsel.” She is the personification natural law and divine order. In modern terms she might be considered the goddess of cause and effect. Things happen repeatedly because of the presence of Themis. When Zeus and Themis came together, they produced a daughter named Dike (Dikee). Dike became the goddess of human justice and is often pictured carrying a balance in her hands – reflecting her desire to find a balance in human relationships. Unfortunately, humans were not as easy to tame as nature, and what Themis was able to accomplish with natural order of the earth, Dike was never able to accomplish with the humanity of the earth. In the end, Dike fled for the stars resolving to only watch the corruption of the earth. But it seems that even though she had fled the earth, it was thought that sometimes she couldn’t help herself and she intervened with the happenings on the earth anyway.

Paul’s shipwreck happened on the Island of Malta (the meaning of Malta is appropriately – Refuge), an island that was well known to sailors. But apparently the shipwreck was on the wrong side of the island – the side that was normally away from commercial traffic. As a result the sailors didn’t recognize the island, and the islanders were not often visited by people from off of the island.

On this day, the islanders were amazed that the people had survived the wreck – and that would have meant that justice (Dike) had maybe smiled on them – and saved them. But when Paul survived the wreck and seemed to have been willing to work to make things better for the shipwrecked on the island, was then bitten by the viper. The people of the island believed that maybe the bulk of the people on the ship were innocent, but that Dike, who allowed the innocent people of the ship to be saved, was not willing to allow the guilty Paul to live. There could be no other explanation for the fact that Paul was apparently going to die after surviving the catastrophe.

In this, Paul would become a character like Jonah, a prophet who tried to run from God, but in the end couldn’t. Dike would catch up to him in the form of snake. Interestingly, it wasn’t the first time that a snake tried to upset the purposes of God. And it wasn’t the first time that God proved that he was bigger than a snake – or any Greek God who might be hanging around.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Colossians 1

Much time had been lost, and sailing had already become dangerous because by now it was after the Day of Atonement. So Paul warned them, “Men, I can see that our voyage is going to be disastrous and bring great loss to ship and cargo, and to our own lives also.” – Acts 27:9-10

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 20, 2015): Acts 27

In “Star Trek, The Original Series,” it was always fun to hear Mr. Spock calculate the odds of something happening. But we also knew going in that the odds didn’t really matter. No matter what the odds were, Captain Kirk was going to go through with the plan. After all, the odds never take into consideration the intangibles – and the determination of a Star Ship Captain. This idea of going against the odds seems to be a major part of story within the Star Trek franchise, as is the calculation of the odds. In “The Next Generation” the job of calculating the odds fell to Commander Data, who often seemed to hear from those around him that they had no desire to hear the odds. In “Voyager” it was the unflappable Tuvok that made the calculations. But no matter who was making the odds calculations, the results were always the same – the plan would go ahead against the odds. And often, the plan would also be successful, even against long odds.

Real life is seldom like that. We might beat the odds once in a while, but as a rule it just doesn’t happen. Las Vegas is built on that very principle. The odds in the Nevada gambling establishments are all in the favor of the house, and sometimes you can beat the house, but most of the time the house beats you. In our Lotteries the same principal holds. Sometimes, someone wins. But for a person to win that multi-million dollar prize, there has to be a lot of people who are willing to pay for the privilege of losing.

Paul has not received a word from God that tells him that the trip is dangerous. This is also not a case of Jonah running away from God and, therefore, putting his fellow travelers at risk. Paul is simply performing the role of Mr. Spock, Data, and Tuvok – he is calculating the odds. For ancient sailing ships, the trip across the Mediterranean Sea was always dangerous, but at certain times of the year it was even more dangerous; and at other times the trip was simply impossible. Common sense dictated that ancient vessels should not sail the Mediterranean between September 15 and March 15. But it was technically still possible to sail the Mediterranean until about mid-November – it just was not advisable. And Paul knew exactly what he was talking about. He had already been shipwrecked, more than once.

But there was apparently a rush to get Paul to Rome, and so the trip is embarked on late in the year. According to Acts, the boat left its port on the East side of the Mediterranean after the Day of Atonement (Yom Kipper). Some have estimated that Paul’s trip back to Rome started in 59 C.E. If that is true, then in 59 the Day of Atonement took place on October 5. But whatever the year was, the Day of Atonement always took place in the danger zone after September 15 – and usually in the early days of October.       

The trip was ill advised, the odds were against the ship ever reaching Rome. But Paul’s warning (much like the warnings of Spock, Data and Tuvok) falls on deaf ears. No matter what the odds, the trip has to be attempted. And the only hope is that luck and the intangibles will make for a successful trip – against all of the odds.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 28     

Agrippa said to Festus, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.” – Acts 26:32

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 19, 2015): Acts 26

“What if” games are fun to play, a fact that is evidenced by the number of “what if” novels and articles have been written over the length of history. What if the South had won the Civil war? Common opinion seems to be that a South victory would have resulted in the creation of three nations in the place of the United States – the Union, the Confederation, and The great nation of Texas. Without the North winning, the dream of a United States would have been dead.

Another interesting “what if” scenario was suggested by Gore Vidal in his novel “The Smithsonian Institution” (the novel that he believed was the basis for the “Night at the Museum” series of movies, although the movies were actually based on a Children’s book by the same name.) According to Vidal, the key ingredient to avoiding the Second World War was to not elect Woodrow Wilson as President of the United States. His logic was that without Woodrow Wilson, there would have been no League of Nations. And without a League of Nations, the environment that allowed Adolf Hitler to rise in Germany would have never come into being. And of course, with no Hitler there would be no Second World War.

But there is maybe a more likely scenario. What if Woodrow Wilson had not only set up the principles which would guide the creation of the League of Nations, but had also been successful in drawing the United States into the League (The United States of America never joined the League of Nations, despite the role that President Wilson played in its creation.) But if the United States had joined the League, their support for Britain and France may also have changed the environment in central Europe, and Hitler would never have been allowed to rise. But all of this is nothing but speculation.

Biblical experts have long enjoyed another “what if” situation – what if Paul had not appealed to Rome during his time in Jerusalem. And the most obvious answer is that if he had not invoked his own Roman Citizenship, then King Agrippa could have set him free, and maybe his eventual death in Rome might have been delayed. For some, this event is included as one of the mistakes that Paul made during his career.

But others have looked at the situation and argued that even this may not have been a mistake. Because Paul appealed to Caesar, the Empire paid for Paul’s journey to Rome, a place that Paul had never visited, but had always wanted to visit. In this act, the empire furthered Paul’s missionary experience as Paul preached the Gospel through the trip to Rome. It also meant that Paul would have the chance to preach in front of the kings of the Gentiles – an event that had been prophesied at the times of Paul’s conversion (¹⁵ But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel – Acts 9:15.) It might have been that all of these circumstances had been made possible by Paul’s call to Caesar at the prompting of the Holy Spirit.

While there is nothing in this passage to argue that King Agrippa was ever close to accepting the Christian faith, some have argued that his honesty in this situation and his willingness to hear Paul and accept what it was that Paul was saying may have resulted in the king having the blessing of God on his life. The life of Agrippa II is a bit of an anomaly. Born early in the ministry of Jesus, Agrippa ruled over most of the latter half of the first century, dying somewhere between 94 and 100 C.E. In contrast, over the period of his life twelve Caesars ruled in Rome. Ananias the High Priest was killed by his own people at the beginning of the First Jewish Roman War. Governor Festus died within two years of denying Paul justice. Governor Felix perished in the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in 79 C.E. And the Sanhedrin who had plotted both Jesus’ and Paul’s death was forever eliminated in 70 C.E. following the fall of Jerusalem. Only Agrippa II seems to have held his political position throughout the latter half of the Century and only Agrippa died of natural causes at the close of the First Century. And with the death of Agrippa, the house of Herod had finally written its final chapter.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 27

Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, said to Paul, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and stand trial before me there on these charges?” –Acts 25:9

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 18, 2015): Acts 25

Laurence Peter is probably best remembered as the co-author of the humorous book “The Peter Principal: Why Things Always Go Wrong.” The Peter Principle basically states that we are promoted because we have been successful in the positions we have held previously, not because we are best suited for the job that we are about to take. The Peter Principle is often phrased this way, ‘we are promoted to level of our incompetence.’ As long as we are successful, we are promoted. But once we reach the level of our incompetence, we fail, or at the very least we stop being successful. And so we remain in that position. The end result is that most career people are incompetent in the positions that they fill. And so they have stopped being promoted.

Governor Felix was corrupt, but he wasn’t incompetent. The same can’t be said for his replacement. Festus had to be incompetent at his position, or he would have never made this suggestion to Paul. Felix was willing to placate the Jews by keeping Paul locked up – at least until he was paid - but Festus wanted to placate the Jews by putting the Apostle on trial in a Jewish court. The problem was that the court proceedings were a sham. There were forty assassins roaming the Middle East ready to assassinate Paul at their first opportunity. The purpose of the trial was simply to get Paul out in the open where the assassins kill him. There would be no trial, just a body which needed to be disposed.

And it is likely that Rome would not have been pleased at this end for one of its citizens. It is not that the Rome was against capital punishment, they had perfected the art of crucifixion (although crucifixion was seldom used as a punishment for a citizen of Rome, and when Paul’s time would eventually come, he would be executed by beheading.) But Rome, in all cases, reserved the right of execution. And when it came to its own citizens it would make no exceptions. The idea that only Rome had the right to kill you was actually one of the perks of citizenship.

Festus probably never realized how much his incompetence could have cost him on this day. In reality, he was the big winner of the day. Paul refusal to be tried in a Jewish court meant that Paul would continue to live and Festus would continue to be governor – at least for a little while.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 26

When two years had passed, Felix was succeeded by Porcius Festus, but because Felix wanted to grant a favor to the Jews, he left Paul in prison. – Acts 24:27

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 17, 2015): Acts 24

The Movie “American Sniper” (2014) has just been released and it is already taking criticism. The argument is that the movie violates the events that really happened, and that the original story is based so much on hate that there is no way to mediate it. For many, it seems that the movie glorifies the very things that they believe should not be glorified. But the movie might be important for a totally different reason – and for a reason that has absolutely nothing to do with the historicity of the story. In the advertising teaser, we are introduced to the main character (Chris Kyle) as he looks down the barrel of his gun at a woman and a child, and he believes that the woman has given a bomb to the child, and now that child, carrying a bomb, is moving toward the American position. The sniper cries out to others who are watching the situation, hoping that someone can verify what it is that he thinks he is seeing, but no one has a position that reveals what it is that Chris Kyle has seen. And now he has to make a decision. If he shoots the child and he is carrying a loaf of bread, his career, and in many ways his life, will be over. There will be charges, and imprisonment that would have to follow that kind of an act. But if the child is carrying a bomb, then American lives are in trouble. (To know what happens next, watch the movie.)

But the reason why the movie, and more specifically this scene, is important is not because of the idea that this might have actually happened; it is important because of the political and racial landscape that exists today in North America – and more specifically in the United States. The problems between the police and American Black population has reached a level we have not seen for a while. And the pressure continues to build. We have almost reached a point where the truth no longer matters, and where all that does matter is what is perceived through our own interpretation of the world. Please, don’t read this as a judgment in favor of one side or the other, because that is not what is intended. But the reality is that today it seems to be more dangerous to be Black in America than it was yesterday – and it is just as dangerous to be identified as law enforcement.

For some, the answer is to have police officers wearing camera’s as they move through their day (after all, it works so well in American Football and Hockey – they never make any mistakes anymore) so that we can see the events as they happened later. But the biggest problem is that we are not in the situation, with all of the emotions and fears of the situation, and with all of the biases and prejudices that seems to be inherent in the situation. And the ultimate danger, something that we seem to be on the brink of, is that we will begin to make decisions according to popular opinion rather than according to what really happened. We will begin to make our decisions on the basis of the fact that the police are always wrong (or always right), or the power of popular opinion. In the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, of a few weeks ago, it would be very easy to make the judgment in such a way as to minimize the protests, rather than on the basis of what we think (and I have said that we will never really know) is the truth. Or that the judgment in next situation that arises will be based on the public reaction in the past rather than on the details of the current circumstance.

And this is exactly what is happening in Jerusalem. Felix was not a liked man. His reputation is that he occupies the position of governor on the basis of what he can gain. Truth, during the reign of Felix, could be bought. Luke makes the comment that he was meeting frequently with Paul hoping that would pay him for his release. Felix was recalled because of an outbreak of conflict between the Jewish and non-Jewish segments of the population in Caesarea. And Felix’s answer was to send in the troops (police) and, as a result, many Jews were slaughtered. The popular opinion was that Jews were killed because Felix wanted it to be that way. He had no patience for the native population he oversaw.  As a result of Felix’s action, the conflict was increased instead of deceased – and Rome recalled Felix and it is only because of the intervention of Felix’s brother Pallas that Felix suffered no other discipline other than his removal from office. But the text reminds us that Paul was left in prison because he would not pay his way out, and because that is what the Jews wanted – and Felix hoped that by keeping Paul in prison this one act could atone for some of the other sins that he had committed against the Jews.

It is interesting that Pilate and Felix share this trait in common. It seems that both knew that their prisoners (Jesus for Pilate and Paul for Felix) were innocent, but they decided to act according to political expediency rather than what they believed to be true. Truth did not matter near as much as how the current situation could be twisted into an advantage for the governor. And it seems, in this moment, that we might be standing close to partaking in the same sin.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 25

Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.” – Acts 23:6

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 16, 2015): Acts 23

Alberta. A province in Canada and, in 2012, maybe the only place on earth where a politically right leaning government could lose an election to a challenger who was even further right on the political scale. But that was 2012. A little more than two years later, in December of 2014, all of that seemed to change. The problem was that the fight between the two right governments never really developed. The sitting moderately right government held its ground against its challenger on the extreme right, and over the past couple of years the sitting government maintained its strength. So in December an event happened that had been unknown in contemporary politics. The Leader of the official opposition, the party on the far right, and a few other elected representatives from that party crossed the floor and joined the ruling, more moderately right, government. The excuse was that the two right governments needed to make sure that they stood for what was right (double meaning intended), something that those who crossed the floor felt that they could not guarantee as long as they stood apart.

But … not everyone agreed with the actions of the floor crossers. Some members of the party on the far right have vowed to fight on. But there might not be much fight left. And the dream of the political parties occupying the center and on the left may be forever gone – the idea that the parties on the right would split their vote and allow one of the other parties to form the provincial government.

Some have found these actions of Paul’s to be distasteful. It seems that he had found the gospel message falling on deaf ears, and so he decided to move in a different direction. Among his accusers were Sadducees and Pharisees, two groups who were divided themselves on political grounds. The Sadducees occupied their position on the political left, and the Pharisees stood on the political right. And one of the issues that separated the two was centered on the idea of resurrection. The Sadducees had given up on the belief as a fairy tale told to children, but the Pharisees clung to the truth of the idea – they believed that one day they would know and experience the reality of the resurrection.

And so Paul decides to make the most of the divide. His hope is that he can separate his accusers and have them fight against each other instead of against him. And so he tells the Pharisees two things, the first is that he is a Pharisee, and the second is that the reason why the Sadducees are persecuting him is because he too believes in the resurrection.

Some have wondered if Paul was telling the truth, or if he was maybe stretching things in order to take the focus off of him. But there is really no question. Paul was speaking the truth very clearly. Of the fact that he was a Pharisee there can be no doubt. Repeatedly we are told of his education and promotion among the Pharisees of Israel before the time of his conversion on the Damascus Road. But he was also telling the truth when he said that he was being persecuted because he believed in the resurrection. The gospel of Christ that he preached centered on the resurrection of Jesus, and the promise of life everlasting to all who would dare to follow the path of Christ.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 24

“Then the Lord said to me, ‘Go; I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’ The crowd listened to Paul until he said this. Then they raised their voices and shouted, “Rid the earth of him! He’s not fit to live!” – Acts 22:21-22

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 15, 2015): Acts 22

I have some concerns with regard to the Christian Church. I am part of it, although the church may not always believe that this is a good thing. By denomination I am a Baptist, although, again that is not the denomination with which I have always aligned myself. But one of the things that has attracted me to this group is their belief in diversity – at least, a belief that they maintain on paper. Baptist’s hold to the belief that every person, and every congregation, has the right and the duty to do just as God has instructed them. Again, on paper, this is one of the highest duties. No one has the right to impress on someone else their ideas about God. Ideally, as long as I can sit down and explain my beliefs according to the words found in the Bible – the Holy Scriptures, the Book – then people may disagree with the conclusions that I have reached, but they must allow me to follow the God that I serve. I do not pretend to be always right – in fact, I believe that one of the weaknesses of the Christian Church is that we do not fail nearly enough – we do not risk enough as we follow God. But we must be allowed to walk that path.

Recently I had the opportunity to speak to a group of Baptists, however, they were not part of a the congregation to which I belong, about this very idea. And I suggested some hot topic ideas and that have caused division within the Christian church, and in some cases have cause Baptist denominations to condemn Walt Disney Productions – admittedly an interesting practice – and argued that as long as we can honestly say that this is what I believe that God has directed us to do, then we need to be okay with that – accept that.

But we don’t. We find the differences in what we believe as reason to divide and separate. Even the Baptist’s denominations have divided over issues, often issues of marginal importance. The flavor of Baptists to which I belong separated from another flavor over the idea of women in ministry – we believe that we are called to follow God regardless of what sex we happen to be. God calls women to minister in the same way that he calls men. Inside the Christian Church there can be no difference. And for that sin we have been cast out.

Paul is a sought after teacher in Israel, and he holds the attention of the people Jerusalem until he speaks of the Gentiles. As soon as he dares to say that God has sent him to minister to those who are not Jews and have not accepted the Jewish way of life, the people want him dead. That is not an orthodox teaching. Paul cannot have been sent to those who are not Jews. He must be wrong. He must be in sin. And that means that Paul must die.

Yet the people wanted to kill Paul for something that God had truly led him to – the inhabitants of Jerusalem had become deaf to the concerns of God. Their God had been placed in a Jewish box – and he could never emerge, the people wouldn’t let him. And they were willing to kill anyone who dared to say anything differently. This was the God of the Bible that they had read, and discussed, and taught, and what Paul was teaching was simply too dangerous a variation – and it violated everything that they knew about God.

I am concerned for the Christian Church, because sometimes I see in us, not the willingness to follow God like Paul, but a people who have placed God in a box and are desperately afraid to let him out – just like the people who wanted to kill Paul. We don’t have all of the answers, and there may be something very important in the teaching of the ones we would throw away. Could it be that God is once again sending another Paul into his church, so that we can become everything that God has intended us to be? Is that a strong enough possibility to cause us to pause, and simply listen, to those who hold beliefs that are different from ours, but whose ideas still proceed from the same book that we call Holy. 

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 23

As the soldiers were about to take Paul into the barracks, he asked the commander, “May I say something to you?” “Do you speak Greek?” he replied. “Aren’t you the Egyptian who started a revolt and led four thousand terrorists out into the wilderness some time ago?” – Acts 21:37-38

Today’s Scripture Reading (January 14, 2015): Acts 21

Is it really possible that over a decade after the capture of Saddam Hussein, and almost a decade after the execution of the Iraqi leader, we are still arguing over whether or not Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass destruction? An article released by the New York Times in October 2014 argued that weapons were found, and then asked the question of whether or not that vindicated George Bush. But before the ink was dry, opponents fired back that the only weapons that were found were ancient and decaying weapons that we already knew beyond the shadow of a doubt were there, what we were promised were new weapons – and that is exactly what was never found.

The reality seems to be that if you live in the United States, there is a divide between those who believe that the weapons were found, and those who are sure that they were not. But outside the United States, the divide lessens. Most people not living in the U.S. seem to believe that there were none of the promised weapons inside Iraq. And to make matters worse, both sides are pretty sure that the other side is lying. We may never really know the truth about Saddam’s Iraq.

Paul is placed under arrest by the Roman guard – and the guard seems surprised that Paul could speak Greek. He had been told that this man who was currently in his custody was the Egyptian terrorist that had led a revolt a few years earlier. But the Egyptian apparently wouldn’t have known Greek. And this is also where the story gets a little interesting. There is a bit of discrepancy around the numbers. According to the soldier, the Egyptian led a force of about 4,000 in the revolt. It seems that Josephus differs – at least in one section of his writing. He records that the number of soldiers following the Egyptian numbered in the area of 30,000, and over half of them were killed in the revolt. But Josephus also records that there were only 400 rebel who were killed the revolt, and 200 more were taken prisoner. And so Scholars ask this question – which number is right? Most, not surprisingly, accept the biblical number. But what all the reports agree on was that the Egyptian leader escaped being captured following the revolt.

The number might be unimportant, but there is reason to believe that Josephus’ high number could have been the right one. (And no, I am not suggesting that the Bible is wrong, I am quite confident that 4000 is the number that the soldier gave to Paul, I am just not confident that the soldier had knowledge of the real number – just as I am pretty sure that President Bush believed that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, regardless of what the truth might have been.)  If the 30,000 number is right, it would have represented a significant uprising, larger than Rome may have wanted to admit was possible within its borders, thus the smaller number that the soldier spoke of and the even smaller suggestion in Josephus’ second number might have simply been propaganda. What that meant was that the Egyptian was a much more feared opponent than we may have suspected. And the memory of the Egyptian was still of use. The Egyptian was a significant enough threat that the accusation could be used against Paul in order to justify his arrest, and possibly even his quick execution. And if Paul had been an uneducated man, the plan may have worked.  

But, at the appropriate time Paul spoke Greek and destroyed the illusion that had been created. The man that they had in custody was not the Egyptian, he was just another Jew in a nation of Jews.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Acts 22