And he kissed all his brothers and wept over them. Afterward his brothers talked with him. – Genesis 45:15

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 30, 2015): Genesis 45

Ten years after the last bullet had been fired and the last bomb had been dropped in the conflict that we know of as World War II, Jean Goss and his wife Hildegard Goss-Mayr, two Christians known for their stand against violence of all kinds, travelled to Poland with a request. Was it possible for a group of Christians in Poland to meet with another group of Christians from West Germany? The West German Christian would travel to Poland at their own expense for the meeting. They wanted to come and ask for forgiveness.

The request was made and the group of Polish Christians sat in a stunned silence. Finally one member of the group responded to the request with the words that probably everyone else at the meeting was thinking. “What you ask is impossible. Each stone in Warsaw is soaked with Polish blood. This thing that you ask cannot be done. We cannot forgive.”

The Goss’s nodded. They understood the reaction. Ten years might have passed, but the wounds were still raw. Forgiveness would happen, but it might be generations away. The reluctance of the Polish delegation to meet with their West German counterparts was understandable – maybe even expected. The pair began to gather their things in order to leave, but before they left they stopped to celebrate one of the great symbols of Christian unity – they stopped to pray “The Lord’s Prayer” together with their Polish friends. Everyone in the room, including the Goss’s, had suffered from the German aggression during the Second World War.  As they reached the words of the prayer that says “Forgive our sins as we forgive …” the voices in the room stopped. The tension could have been cut with a knife.

The same spokesman that had so eloquently outlined the reasons why a meeting with the West German Christians could not happen, now raised his tear filled eyes to look at Jean and Hildegard. His voice quivered as he spoke his next words. “I must say yes to you. I could no more pray the Our Father, I could no longer call myself a Christian – if I refuse to forgive.”

Forgiveness is one of the essential elements of our human existence. Every one of us has wronged someone and been wronged by others. Without forgiveness, the weight of the debt just continues to build. Forgiveness says I no longer hold you responsible – it lifts a weigh off of both the party that has wronged and the one who has offended. And while we can forgive someone without their active involvement in the process, the full power of forgiveness is not realized until we can sit down and talk together.

Sometimes I wish Genesis outlined what it was that Joseph and his brothers talked about in this moment in their history. But then again, I am pretty sure that I know. In the midst of catching up on all the details of life, forgiveness became a reality in the family of Israel. The wronged and the offender began to realise the importance of forgiveness. And because of it, a family and a nation was changed.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 46

Then put my cup, the silver one, in the mouth of the youngest one’s sack, along with the silver for his grain.” And he did as Joseph said. – Genesis 44:2

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 29, 2015): Genesis 44

A few weeks ago a McKinney, Texas police officer was filmed as he physically attacked and pulled a gun on a group of teens at a pool party that had apparently gotten out of control. The attack was filmed and then placed on YouTube, inviting the world to watch and to judge the police behavior. The video is admittedly hard to watch, especially as it is yet another example of a white police officer struggling to control a group of black kids. The dust has begun to settle, so what exactly did happen. As you watch the video it is evident that the police officer simply “lost it.” Emotions were high, it was hot, he was wearing “thirty pounds of gear” (his own words caught on the tape), this was not where he wanted to be, and no one seemed to be listening to him – his sense of authority was being threatened. The result was that he let his temper rule him for the moments that he was on camera. As he talked to a couple of teens that protested their innocence and the fact that they had just arrived at the party, this became abundantly clear. The officer is upset because the kids aren’t listening. The newcomers may have just arrived, but they were guilty of not following orders and they, in the officer’s words, “got caught.” Not obeying the police officer is a crime; they had followed “the mob” and were guilty.

Did the officer have reason to react the way he did? This becomes the heart of the problem. I have been there. I have had to confront a group of kids who simply were not listening, and no matter what you do they are intent in doing something else. And at some point I have yelled at them (I had no gun to pull on them and successfully refrained from throwing any of them to the ground) – but somewhere inside of me some portion of me wondered who the idiot is that is yelling at the kids. My guess is that as the officer in question reviews the footage today, three weeks after the event, he is probably asking the same question – Who exactly was the madman with those kids. So the answer to the question of whether he had reason to react the way he did is a qualified “yes.” The reason was present, but the reality is that he went way too far. When things began to get out of control he should have removed himself from the situation, got his own temper under control, and waited for back-up. My hope is that every police officer in the past three weeks has been forced to watch this video with the clear instructions that a line is being drawn that cannot be crossed; this simply cannot happen again. There has to be another way to deal with people in these situations. And at this point, we can expect that people will be trying to set up police officers just to see how they will react.

Joseph sets his trap perfectly. His bothers had “lost it” with him. They had watched him grow up as the favored one. They were jealous, and they decided to do something against this dreamer. It was a spur of the moment thing. They were not thinking, and once the ball started rolling I am not sure that anyone could figure out how to stop it. Was it justified? I understand the anger and the jealousy, but much like the McKinney police officer, they went too far. And it is clear that Joseph realizes all of this as well. Now Joseph wants to know whether or not they truly understand what they had done wrong – and whether or not they had changed.

So he sets them up. At the dinner he gives the largest portions of food to Benjamin, his younger brother. Once more the brothers are faced with brother who has been obviously favored above them. He is the honored one, even though the boy has done nothing to earn the honor. And now, as the brothers prepare to leave, he places his own personal silver goblet, most likely covered with designs and worth much more than just the weight of the silver that the cup contained, in Benjamin’s sack. Benjamin had been honored, and now the brothers were given a reason to abandon him. It would not be their fault. Benjamin was the one who stole the goblet. They could get rid of another honored brother and there was no way that the blame could come to rest on them.

And now all that Joseph had to do was to wait and see how his brother’s would react to the trap. If they allowed Benjamin to be arrested and thrown in jail, they were the same brothers who had mistreated him years earlier. But if they came to his aid, then, maybe, they had really changed. Joseph needed to know, and he also needed to make sure that his younger brother was kept safe.  

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 45

Israel asked, “Why did you bring this trouble on me by telling the man you had another brother?” – Genesis 43:6

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 28, 2015): Genesis 43

Steven Hawking once commented that he understands the workings of the universe much better than he understands human behavior. In his own words “while physic and mathematics may tell us how the universe began, they are not much use in predicting human behavior because there are far too many questions to solve. I’m no better than anyone else at understanding what makes people tick, particularly women.” Hawking is right, at least most of the time. Our behavior is simply too complex to predict well. We never really know how we, or any other person, will react to a certain set of circumstances. And personally, I think that we not only can surprise a genius like Stephen Hawking, but that sometimes God looks down on this planet and can do nothing but shake his head and mutter to himself “I didn’t think that they would do that!”

Most of the time this is true. But the exception might be when we are suffering under high levels of stress. There seems to be a quite accurate mathematical model for behavior under stress. The mathematical formula is actually quite simple. It is CB = OB + BC(SI) or Current Behavior (CB) is equal to Original Behavior (OB) plus any Behavioral Change (BC) times the Stress Indicator (SI), where the Stress Indicator is measured with a number between 0 and 1 – and the as the individual situational stress rises, the Stress indicator approaches zero. Confused? It’s okay. All that formula really tells us is that the higher our stress, the more our Current Behavior reverts back to our Original Behavior patterns because Behavioral Change is minimized by the increased stress level. In times of stress, our whole behavioral system seems to reset itself to the patterns that used to work for us – our Original Behavior. Stress always minimizes Behavioral Change.

And it would seem that this is exactly what is happening in Jacob’s life. He has learned and he has changed. Jacob is no longer the young man who stole his brother’s birth rite and his blessing. He is no longer the devious worker who had engaged for more than a decade in a battle of wits with Laban. Jacob the deceiver has been subdued of late, but he is not totally gone. And now as his family is threatened one more time, all of the behavioral change Jacob had achieved disappears and the deceiving Jacob returns. His question to his sons is a simple one. Why did you have to tell the truth about your family? Why did you even bother mentioning your younger brother? As far as Jacob was concerned, the Egyptian official would have never known if his sons had lied to him.

Of course, we know that that was not the case. Joseph had a keen interest in the way that his half-brothers had treated his younger – and only full – brother. The omission of Benjamin could have signalled to Joseph that his brothers hadn’t changed and that they had done away with Benjamin after they had gotten rid of Joseph. In Joseph’s mind, the fate of Benjamin was a key element in the drama that was to follow. Jacob’s plan of deception would have most likely resulted in the destruction of the family. The only thing that could save them in this moment was the truth – a truth that Jacob’s sons had been willing to offer.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 44

But Jacob did not send Benjamin, Joseph’s brother, with the others, because he was afraid that harm might come to him. – Genesis 42:4

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 27, 2015): Genesis 42

Eighteenth Century author John Allston once wrote that “The only thing you take with you when you’re gone is what you leave behind.” Admittedly, on tough Monday mornings after Weekend services that just didn’t go quite as planned, it is a question that plagues me. Exactly what is it that we believe we are leaving behind when we are gone? Or maybe more importantly, what exactly should we doing to ensure that our legacy is what we want it to be. And are our actions really carrying us in the right direction. Incidentally, the title of the final Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode was entitled “What You Leave Behind” – most likely an allusion to the Allston quote.

A related thought to the Allston quote is found in the idea that “you can’t take it with you, but you can read about it in the lives of others.” But the question that bothers us is “exactly who are these others who will reflect me.” The answer: our children. Whether we approve of the idea or not, our children often reflect exactly who it is that we are. During a recent meltdown that happened in my presence I was forced to realize how well an adult child was reflecting her mother – and not in a good way. If I closed my eyes I could almost see and hear her mom saying the exact same words now being spoken by the daughter. Which brings us to another disturbing thought, what our kids pick up from us and reflect to others is often not the good, but rather it is the bad. Maybe this is why many family trees seem to experience the harsh reality of the degenerations.

What Jacob was going to leave behind would be seen in the legacy of how his children would live their lives. This was the beginning of a great nation. And there is no indication that he did not love all of his children, but two sons were extremely special. After the marriage of Jacob to Leah, I really believe that Jacob came to love Leah more than he probably ever thought that he would. But unfortunately that didn’t change the fact that the first one to steal his heart by that well as she was watering her sheep was Rachel. And while he loved all of his sons, the two sons that Rachel gave to him occupied the highest place in his heart – Joseph and Benjamin. Rachel had died giving birth to Benjamin, and Jacob believed that Joseph had been killed by wild animals. And so Benjamin was his treasure – he was the image that Jacob intended to leave behind.

And so as the family adventure continued, Benjamin was effectively kept under glass. He was as protected from the outside world as his father could possibly make him. He was the child of Jacob’s legacy, and the only surviving remembrance of a wife that Jacob had worked fourteen years in order to marry. Because Rachel had been priceless to Jacob, there was no way that Benjamin could be anything else.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 43

Personal Note: Happy 56^th Anniversary to my Dad and Mom. May Cheri and I be an appropriate Legacy to the way that you have lived your lives!

 

And all the world came to Egypt to buy grain from Joseph, because the famine was severe everywhere. – Genesis 41:57

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 26, 2015): Genesis 41                                         

The opening line to the Paul Bunyan tale “Babe the Blue Ox” reads –

Well now, one winter it was so cold that all the geese flew backward and all the fish moved south and even the snow turned blue. Late at night, it got so frigid that all spoken words froze solid afore they could be heard. People had to wait until sunup to find out what folks were talking about the night before.

We understand the words, even though we don’t believe what the writer is attempting to tell us. No one believes that all the geese flew backwards, or that it was so cold that the words froze in mid-air and the people had to wait until the next morning to hear what it was that was said the night before, but we get the message. It was a cold Minnesota night. Those of us who live in the northern part of the Northern hemisphere have lived through those nights even if we have never experienced a Minnesota in winter. We know that kind of cold.

The literary tool is called hyperbole – the act of exaggerating something to the absolute extreme (like words that freeze in mid-air on a cold, winter’s night). And it might be the one of the most used literary devices in our library. Hyperbole is usually in use whenever we choose to describe something in absolute terms – whenever we say that something always happens, or never happens. Or that we attended a party and everybody was there. We don’t need anyone to interpret the words; we know that not everyone attended the party, but that there was a significant portion of a certain group that had attended.

Jesus loved hyperbole. In speaking to the Pharisees, Jesus said “You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel” (Matthew 23:24). We don’t take Jesus words literally expecting the Pharisees to have accidently swallowed a camel, but we understand the meaning of Jesus words – the Pharisees were focusing on the minor things and missing some major issues in their spiritual lives. No one has to explain that to us. In John 12, the Pharisees tell each other that their plans are “getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him” (John 12:19)! Interpretation – there were crowds that were following Jesus, but not the whole world. Jesus ministry at the time was centered in Israel, there were huge swaths of the world that had never even heard of him, let alone had followed him.  

So the question becomes, when is the Bible speaking in hyperbole, and when is it literal? And that is unlikely to be an easy task. When Jesus said “For God so loved the world …” was that hyperbole? (I vote no – God loves the world.) But this passage in Genesis 41 has often been interpreted as being hyperbole. Yet here there does not seem to be an overwhelming reason to believe that. Or maybe to rephrase it, there is no reason to believe that there was not a famine at this time in history throughout the known world. We know from this story that the famine extended up the east side of the Mediterranean Sea into the Fertile Crescent. And it would seem that if the Fertile Crescent was suffering from famine, the famine might have extended into other areas of the known world as well.

Whether or not the whole world was genuinely threatened, we may never know. But what we do know is that the convoluted story of Joseph was about to reach its climax. And because of all that Joseph had been through, the whole world was not only threatened by famine, but were also about to find their salvation in this Hebrew leader in Egypt.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 42

But when all goes well with you, remember me and show me kindness; mention me to Pharaoh and get me out of this prison. – Genesis 40:14

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 25, 2015): Genesis 40

One of Mahatma Gandhi’s guiding principles for uniting India was a strong belief in the importance of every person – and of every belief system. It was this commitment that led him to believe strongly in the idea of religious pluralism for the future of Hindu dominated India – a belief system that was put to the test with a movement toward an Islamic State outside of the Hindu majority state of India – a movement that ended with the creation of Pakistan. But in Gandhi’s thought process, such a move was unnecessary because of the importance of each individual – and the meaning that was inherent in every life.

Whatever you do in life will be insignificant. But it is very important that you do it because, you can't know; you can't ever really know the meaning of your life, and you don't need to. Just know that your life has a meaning. Every life has a meaning; whether it lasts one-hundred years or one-hundred seconds. Every life and every death changes the world in its own way.” – Mahatma Gandhi

The belief that every life has meaning and purpose should change the way we look at our world. Life and death are not only an essential parts of our existence, they change the world every time that they make their presence known to us.

Joseph interprets the dream of the cupbearer. In this moment they are equals. Both are prisoners, and both have been unjustly placed in this prison - they share in a persecution that has been perpetuated against them. But the cupbearer’s dream reveals to Joseph that in a few days the cupbearer will be restored. In a few days, things will change between Joseph and this servant of the king. Suddenly, the cupbearer’s life will seem to be worth so much more than that of Joseph’s – and Joseph’s request is that, in that moment, the cupbearer will simply remember him. Even though the trajectories of their lives will suddenly change, in reality they will remain as equals.

There is absolutely no indication that Joseph realized the special path that his life was going to take. This was not about some sort of delusion of grandeur on behalf of Joseph. He would have probably agreed with Gandhi that everything that he did in life was insignificant. But it was important that he do it, because ultimately the meaning of his life was not in his hands, it was in the hands of his God.

Sometimes we need to step back and remember exactly this – that all life is important and that all meaning ultimately belongs in hands that are not ours - that regardless of the many things that we sometimes believe separates us, we are all the same – and all of us are created by the same God.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 41

So the warden put Joseph in charge of all those held in the prison, and he was made responsible for all that was done there. – Genesis 39:22

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 24, 2015): Genesis 39

Peter Drucker has been described as the founder of modern management. But the real key to Drucker’s reassessment of management principles was that he redefined what it meant to be a leader. Too often in our culture, leadership seems to be a position. Our belief is often summed up by the statement “if I was the president, then I would show the world what kind of a leader I am.” But the misconception that we hold is that leadership is a function of position. And that belief is fundamentally untrue. Leadership has nothing to do with position. Drucker pointed out that -  

“all the effective leaders I have encountered – both those I worked with and those I merely watched – knew four simple things: a leader is someone who has followers; popularity is not leadership, results are; leaders are highly visible, they set examples; leadership is not rank, privilege, titles or money, it is responsibility.” – Peter Drucker

Unfortunately often institutional leadership, maybe especially inside the church, seems to violate every one of Drucker’s principles. Inside the church, a leader is someone elected or appointed to a position (and often has no followers), they are highly visible (but often for the wrong reasons; their visibility seems to be a matter of ego rather than action), they are popular (but achieve very few results) and leadership is all about recognition and privilege (and never about responsibility.) And all of this might be the reason that the church seems to struggle with going beyond the mediocrity.

Personally, I wish I could find a way to wipe positional leadership out of the church. The fundamental reality is that the easiest thing to give someone is a title, but it might also be the most destructive. I don’t want anyone to lead because they hold a position. I want them to lead because they are leaders – because they have people following them and they have the overwhelming desire to use their natural abilities to change the world in which we live.

Leaders lead. They can’t help it. There is simply something inside of them that drives them to change their world. And Joseph seems to be a phenomenal example of this principle. He is sold into slavery and immediately finds a way to change his situation, becoming a leader inside the house of his master. And when he is placed in prison, the leader within Joseph still couldn’t be contained. Even in prison Joseph leads; he finds himself in charge of all who are in prison with him and is “made responsible” for all that happened there. I am sure there were days when Joseph wanted nothing more than to sink back into obscurity, but the leader inside of him would not allow that – it was going to find a way to be expressed no matter what the outside situation was. His leadership abilities simply refused to be contained.

So don’t wait for someone to give you a position of leadership. If you are a leader, lead. Because you really don’t have any other choice.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 40

As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. “I am pregnant by the man who owns these,” she said. And she added, “See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are.” – Genesis 38:25

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 23, 2015): Genesis 38

A number of years ago I took a Systematic Theology course at a local seminary. The make-up of the class was fairly eclectic, with a wide variety of students coming from a wide variety of theological backgrounds. And with the wide variety of students taking part in the class, our discussions were often fairly rowdy, which personally is exactly what I like in any discussion. Students would vigorously try to defend their idea of what was orthodox belief against other students whose view of orthodoxy was wildly divergent from the first. For the most part, the class was great.

But one student struggled with the class. Most of the time I think he doubted that any of the rest of us could actually be Christian. He just simply didn’t believe the things that we believed, and for him there could be no “wiggle room” in right thinking. For him, doctrine was a straitjacket that he put on every morning proving himself to be Christian, but no one else in the class seemed to be even trying to wear the restricting garment. We seemed to be more attached to our belief in doctrine as a flowing robe that allowed us to move and breathe – and even question exactly what it was that we really did believe. Discussion times often seemed too much for him to handle. And on top of all of this, he was barely passing the course. To him, his grade was further proof of the decadence of the class, and sometimes I am sure that he doubted whether even the prof could really be a Christian.

He was so focussed on what he considered the sin of the class that he did something amazingly out of character to everything that he professed to believe. He bought a term paper. The term paper was graded by the people who sold it to him as a B+ paper. But more importantly, it was a paper that agreed with his own theological bent. He was going to prove that it was not his own competence as a student that was being tested here, it was the unfounded theological bent of the course that was the cause of his struggle. If he received a B+ on the paper, then he was wrong and the course had been fair. But if he got anything lower, then he was being judged on his ultra-conservative theology and not on his academic prowess.

I remember the day that the papers came back. He had a big red F marked on his. He had proven how unfair the class was. I am not sure that it ever even entered into his mind that he had done something very wrong – that in the purchase of the term paper he had violated even his own straight laced theology. That was the last day that I ever saw him in that class or any other. My suspicion is that his unknowing sin had paid a dividend that he was not expecting. Rather than proving his innocence, his paper stood as a testimony of his guilt – and of having gone too far.

There are no heroes in the story of Judah and Tamar. With the exception of Shelah, everyone in the story is wrong. Tamar’s first two husbands, and the first two sons of Judah, die in their rebellion against God. And Judah and Tamar are equally wrong in their actions. And ultimately that is the exactly the message that Tamar sends Judah as she shows the seal, cord and staff that she had received from Judah on the day that he had slept with her. She could not be executed without also bringing Judah down with her.

And Judah can do nothing except let her go. They are both guilty of sexual misconduct, but additionally Judah is guilty of not fulfilling his promise to allow Tamar to marry Shelah when he came of age. In his mind, Judah was protecting the life of his youngest son, but the deaths of his two older boys had nothing to do with Tamar, and that was something that Judah had been unable to see. And it may not have been until this moment that Judah realized how very wrong he had been, as well as being confronted by the extreme consequences of his own sin.   

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 39

“Come now, let’s kill him and throw him into one of these cisterns and say that a ferocious animal devoured him. Then we’ll see what comes of his dreams.” – Genesis 37:20

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 22, 2015): Genesis 37

I have a dream …

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." … I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today! (Martin Luther King – August 28, 1963)

The words of Dr. King continue to ring through the pages of history. A dream, not of things as they are, but of things as they should be. A dream of racial equality. It is a dream that we need as much today as on the day that Dr. King spoke his memorable words.

But not everyone shared the dream – so they decided to kill the dreamer. After all, it is the ultimate test of a dream – whether or not the dream can survive without the dreamer. In the case of Dr. King, we caught the dream. The dream went from belonging to a Black Civil Rights leader to being the dream of people of all colors. They could kill the dreamer, but not the dream.

The murder of Dr. King was not the first time that a dreamer was killed in order to try and kill a dream, I wish it was the last, but somehow I doubt it. The first time might have been the attempted murder of Joseph. His dream was that he would be the leader of his family. The dream, without context, seemed to be the product of pride out of control. It was a dream of pure arrogance. The thought that this younger sibling would one day rule the family was a dream that needed to be erased. And if the dreamer was dead, then he would not be in a position to rule any longer.

But what the brothers failed to understand was that the high position of their younger brother would one day be necessary if the family was going to survive. This was not a dream of arrogance, it was a God dream that would protect the family – and the future nation – of Israel. And because it God dream, it could not be killed.

I have a dream. It is a dream where all of us are equal, where hate is a thing of the past. I have a dream of a society where we are simply willing to love each other in spite of the things that separate us and make us different. I have a dream of a world where black and white and every other skin color in the spectrum of races simply doesn’t matter. I have a dream. It is a dream, not of things as they are, but of things as they should be. It is a dream that refuses to die – and one that, I believe, the fate of our world depends on.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 38

Their possessions were too great for them to remain together; the land where they were staying could not support them both because of their livestock. – Genesis 36:7

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 21, 2015): Genesis 36

I was amazed recently to read an article that argued that “The Eagles” breakup was precipitated, at least in part, by their hit song “Take It to the Limit.” Beyond their personality differences (and much publicized fights between Glenn Frey and Don Felder), as well as diverse visions for the band by the various members, the truth is that “The Eagles” suffered from an embarrassment of riches. Among the members of the Band were some of the most talented musicians of a generation. They were great song writers and vocally they achieved some great harmonies. Sometimes it seemed as if maybe – just maybe – the band was simply too talented to stay together.

But the argument that adds “Take It to the Limit” to the break up dialogue takes us down a different path. The song was one of the most popular “Eagles” songs, and it is one of only three Eagles Top 40 songs not to feature either Glenn Frey or Don Henley as the lead vocalist. The vocalist on “Take It to the Limit” was bass guitarist Randy Meisner. Meisner, who also co-wrote the song, was the only member of the band that could sing it - none of the others were able to reach the high notes of the song. But the problem was that Meisner was shy, and quite content to be “just a member of the band.” He didn’t mind singing the song, but the truth was that when he was nervous, even he couldn’t consistently hit the high note at the end of the song. His request, he would sing the song, but not every night. Glenn Frey disagreed. The song was too popular not to sing every night – and sometimes the song was planned as an encore song. The fight was on – and finally Randy Meisner left the band, apparently so that he wouldn’t have to sing the song again. But when Meisner left, he also took with him part of the distinctive “Eagles” sound. And according to some, the countdown to the end of the band had started.

On the night that Jacob stole the blessing that Isaac had intended to give to Esau, Esau’s cry was “Do you have only one blessing, my father” (Genesis 27:38)? Esau wanted just one blessing from his father. He seemed to believe that without his father’s blessing, he was going to be left destitute while his brother got rich. But what Esau missed was that he was still the grandson of Abraham, and God’s blessing was on all of the children of Abraham. And just as Abraham and Lot had to separate, and Isaac and Ishmael had to separate; Jacob and Esau also could not live in the same region. Yet all of them lived under the blessing – and the riches – of God. They were simply too rich to stay together – they suffered under an embarrassment of riches.

Esau chose the rugged area to the south of the Dead Sea – maybe seventy miles from his brother. It may not have been as hospitable as the land chosen by Jacob, but it was where Esau seemed to want to live – it was where Esau could be rich.

In the end, maybe it was just an embarrassment of riches that broke up “The Eagles,” but each of the members defined riches in a different way, and for the shy Randy Meisner, one hit to sing was simply too many.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 37

Then God said to Jacob, “Go up to Bethel and settle there, and build an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you were fleeing from your brother Esau.” – Genesis 35:1

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 20, 2015): Genesis 35

The most common prayer of humanity probably starts out something like this – “God if you will get me out of this than I will …” The blank probably varies, but the sentiment of the prayer is fairly stable. And then time does its thing. God delivers on his promise, or dumb luck intervenes, either way we escape from the situation and the prayer, well, it is forgotten – at least, until the next crisis appears - and then we start to pray it again and the cycle repeats itself. I don’t think that it is malicious on our part, I don’t think it is because we intend to not keep our part of the bargain, it is just that when the crisis ends and our stress level drops, our priorities begin re-arrange. And besides, how do we know when it is God that has moved and taken us from our situation and when it is dumb luck. (I have to admit, the movements of God in my life have often looked like dumb luck.)

When Jacob had been running from Esau, he was pretty sure that his life was over. He was leaving the only place that he had ever known, and his own brother wanted him dead. Jacob was a man with a past, but he also seemed to be a man without a future. Exhausted, he had fallen asleep in a field with a stone under his head. But during the night he had a vision of a stairway, and on the stairway the angels of God were ascending and descending, and God himself was standing above the stairway. It all felt so real as God introduced himself to Jacob as the God of Abraham and Isaac. And Jacob knew that this was a holy place, and he promised that if God would watch over him and somehow return him to his home, that he would worship God, and on this place he would build the house of God and he, Jacob, would give to God a tithe or a tenth of everything.

And God watched over Jacob, and brought him home again, and it seemed that Jacob had forgotten all that he had promised to do. Even after “the God of Bethel” had told Jacob to return home, Jacob still seem to struggle in remembering his promise. And so God makes it plain. Go to Bethel and build the altar that you promise to build for me on the night that you were running away from Esau. And then live there and worship me.

The reality is that this is probably what God had intended when he called Jacob back to Canaan in the first place. The phrase “I am the God of Bethel” (Genesis 31:13) was most likely both a reminder to Jacob of the promise that he had made at Bethel, and the place to which God wanted him to return. And if Jacob had gone to Bethel in the first place, the terrible events that had happened at Shechem would never have taken place.

The truth was that on Jacob God was going to build the nation of Israel. But it couldn’t just be a physical nation, Israel needed to be more than that – it had to be a spiritual house. And God’s plan was for the building of that house to begin in Bethel.  

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 36

Three days later, while all of them were still in pain, two of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, took their swords and attacked the unsuspecting city, killing every male. – Genesis 34:25

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 19, 2015): Genesis 34

In 2012, a man walked into the local police department office and placed the severed head of his sister on the counter. He also proclaimed himself innocent of his sister’s death. His sister’s death was her own fault. Earlier in the year she left her marriage (the marriage had been arranged by her parents) on accusations of abuse. But then she had simply disappeared. No one seemed to know why, but it was possibly over a dispute on whether she should return to her abusive spouse. When her brother finally caught up with her, she was living with an old boyfriend. The brother had walked into the house and physically removed her to the street. There, with neighbors looking on, he had publicly declared her sin and then executed her by removing her head off with a large knife. It was an honor killing, and as hard as it might be to believe, honor killings continue to happen today. But there are many that believe that honor killings do nothing but bring more dishonor to the family, to the predominate culture, and to the nations in which they take place. After all, what honor can be found in the killing of a young defenseless girl – no matter what her crime might be?

It is a question that plagues the modern mind’s sense of fairness. In a dual, at least both parties theoretically have a chance, but with an honor killing, the victim is usually both a family member and defenseless. And somehow our minds don’t seem to be able to make sense out of such an action. It seems impossible to defend what is honorable by acting with dishonor. But I recognize that now I am speaking out of my own cultural bias.

Strictly speaking, what Simeon and Levi did in defense of the their sister was not an honor killing because it was carried out against people who were totally unrelated to the brothers, but it did contain some of the same elements. For starters, the killing were in defense of the honor of their sister, Dinah. She had been raped and from the standpoint of her two brothers (Simeon and Levi were full brothers of Dinah – the rest of the boys were half-brothers, all having the same father but different mothers) her honor had been stolen from her and they meant to restore it. But the problem is that in trying to restore honor to the family, the boys acted dishonorably in several ways. First, they used a sacred covenant between the descendants of Abraham and God as a weapon. The circumcision that the men performed on themselves left them incapacitated and vulnerable to the violence of Simeon and Levi. The intention of Simeon and Levi was never to bring the Shechemites closer to God, their intention was to incapacitate. Secondly, they backed out of an agreement that they themselves had proposed even after the Shechemites had fulfilled their part of the deal to the letter. Thirdly, they killed men who did not have the ability to defend themselves. In this moment there was nothing that the men of Shechem could do to protect themselves. Fourth, the robbery of the town and the surrounding area seemed to be based on greed, not honor. And lastly, in taking the women of the town captive and either using them as slaves, unwilling sexual partners or selling them into slavery, they were committing the same acts of dishonor that had been perpetrated on their sister, but the dishonor of Dinah was simply multiplied hundreds of times as the brothers dealt with the widows and daughters of the town.

While the plan seems to have been conceived by Dinah’s full brothers, it does not seem possible for the plan to have been carried out without the help of all of the brothers. The dishonor that Simeon and Levi felt had touched their family in the act perpetrated against Dinah, now infiltrated the entire family of Jacob. It does not seem possible that anyone could claim to have been innocent of the dishonorable actions of Simeon and Levi. The family of Jacob had become a stench to the other inhabitants of the area. The two brother had brought the whole family down to the level of the worst of the town of Shechem – and the dishonor of the family of Jacob was made complete.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 35

There he set up an altar and called it El Elohe Israel. – Genesis 33:20

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 18, 2015): Genesis 33

Worship is a strange thing. It is something that is highly personalized, and yet we also share it with those around us. Actually, worship is probably best when we are alone – and the bulk of our worship should be happening in those solitary times (if the bulk of your worship is happening in the hour you are in church on Sunday Mornings – or whenever it is that you go to church, then you are most likely in deep spiritual trouble.) Unfortunately, in the last few decades the idea of Christian worship has begun to be tied to tightly to the idea of a specific form of music. It is not that music shouldn’t be a “part” of worship, but the key word is “part.” Worship is more than just music. The most basic definition of worship is anything that gives worth to something. Christian worship honors and gives worth to God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Any actions that you take that accomplish this is essentially worship. In other words, worship should be an essential part of everything that you do, because in everything we want to bring honor to God.

So Jacob arrives in Shechem and he buys a piece of land. On that land he builds a home for his family, and an altar dedicated to his God. Since God had recently called Jacob “Israel,” Jacob dedicates the altar to the “God of Israel” (El Elohe Israel.) This is the first time in Scripture that God would be called this, but it will not be the last time. Here the “God of Israel” will be worshipped.

Centuries in the future this idea of worshipping the “God of Israel” in Shechem will be revisited by a Jewish Rabbi named Jesus and an unnamed Samaritan woman. In that conversation Jesus will be sitting on a well that was believed to have been built by Jacob on this spot (the Hebrew Bible makes no mention of this well, but the digging of a well would have been a common occurrence in ancient times.) As Jesus sat by a well built by Jacob in the vicinity of the place where Jacob had built an altar dedicated to the worship of the “God of Israel,” the Samaritan woman would complain that the Jews believe that the “God of Israel” needs to be worshipped in Jerusalem, while her people want to worship him on their mountain. Since the woman knew that the well was built by Jacob, and that Jacob had himself drank water from this well that Jesus wanted to drink from on that day, she was most likely well aware that that “our father Jacob” has also worshipped the “God of Israel” on this very site. To deny the inhabitants of the area the privilege that Jacob had enjoyed (and Jacob was the convergence point for the Jews and the Samaritans – he was the common ancestor to both groups of people and truly “our father”) simply didn’t make sense. The earliest worship of the “God of Israel” had happened on this very spot. Jesus reply to the woman was direct –

“Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:21-24).

And then Jesus would reveal his nature, likely for the first time ever, to this woman by the well of Jacob – he would tell her the he indeed was the Messiah. It was the Messiah himself who had returned to Jacob’s altar. And in this conversation between Jesus and the Samaritan woman, God was once again worshipped at Shechem.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 34

When the messengers returned to Jacob, they said, “We went to your brother Esau, and now he is coming to meet you, and four hundred men are with him.” – Genesis 32:6

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 17, 2015): Genesis 32

On April 18, 1942, the Lieutenant Colonel James Doolittle led the “Doolittle Raid” or the “Tokyo Raid” on the Island of Japan. The intention of the raid was not really to cause irreparable damage to the island nation, but rather it was a show of force to display to the Japanese people that their Islands were not as safe a haven as the Japanese leaders had led them to believe. The raid took sixteen midsized bombers and sent them on a one way mission. The plan was to bomb Japan and then land in China. The raid caused very little damage in Japan, and all sixteen planes were lost, but only seven of the eighty men sent on the mission were killed – three were killed in action, three were executed by Japan and one died in captivity. But the attack did accomplish the stated mission; Japan was shown to be vulnerable to attack from the U.S., the Japanese morale was diminished and the morale of the average American was increased. Finally, the United States was in a place to be able to respond to Japanese aggression.

As we read the story of the preparation for the meeting of the twin brothers, Jacob and Esau, no one seems to be really sure what is happening here. For some, Esau is on his way with 400 men to make kill Jacob, and it is only Jacob’s humble actions that save him from that end. Others argue that Esau was incapable of holding a grudge for that long; that such an idea goes against his nature. Having said that, Jacob could hold the grudge that long, and his reaction is proof that Jacob never really understood the character of his brother. It might even be that Esau knew of the dangers of the area and had responded with 400 men so that he would be in a position to keep his brother safe. Another argument is that Esau could have received the news of Jacob’s return while he himself had been out in the field dealing with some sort of border dispute. The 400 men were only there because of where it was that Esau was coming from. But, to be honest, we just don’t know.

But, what we do know is that Jacob receives the news of Esau and the 400 man hunting party and it scares him. He knew very clearly what he would do if he was in Esau’s position. And so he reacts accordingly.

The rest of what follows here is nothing more than my personal opinion. I think that the 400 men were largely symbolic. Esau was willing to welcome his brother back, his anger at his brother had long passed, but Jacob needed to know that he would be returning on Esau’s terms. He may have missed out on both the birthright and the blessing, but Esau wanted Jacob to know that the inheritance was firmly in his hands. Esau wanted his brother to realize that he was both forgiven and accepted, but that he could also be reached. If Jacob continued to deceive, Esau would now be in a position to respond. When the two brothers parted, that had not been true, but now it was. Things had changed and Jacob needed to be understood that in Canaan, Esau ruled.    

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 33

I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar and where you made a vow to me. Now leave this land at once and go back to your native land. – Genesis 31:13

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 16, 2015): Genesis 31

Two weeks ago, Vice-President Joe Biden lost his son to cancer. For Biden, this has to be yet another “watershed moment” in his life – a moment where, after this, everything is changed. The truth is that we are not supposed to bury our children, they are supposed to gather around our gravesides and bury us. Something seems to have gone terribly when it happens the other way around. And for Biden, who is entering into the final months of his vice-presidency, this is not the first time. His career actually started with another “watershed moment” – a car accident and the death of his wife and daughter. Biden recently told a graduating class at Yale that as much as they might try they will not be able to control their fates. He told them that “reality has a way of intruding.” Joe Biden would know, reality has intruded repeatedly in his life.

But “watershed moments” are not just something that happens in the lives of the rich and famous. Our lives all contain “watershed moments” – moments that change everything. Looking back over my life I can identify a few – moving 2000 miles away from my childhood home, and all of my relatives, when I was eight; being held at gun point in my first apartment after I left home; business failure – all of these were moment in my life that changed everything – reality had intruded.

Jacob had his own watershed moments, but maybe one of the biggest happened at Bethel. In a moment when Jacob had to be questioning his life and his ability to survive alone in a hostile world - in that moment after he had taken his both his brother’s birthright and his blessing and then had run away from home like a scared child, in the moment when Jacob was finally too tired to take another step and he had stopped running and laid down to sleep; in that moment he dreamed of God. And when he awoke from his slumber he believed that he had stumbled onto a holy place, and he placed a marker as a reminder that this was what the Irish would call a “thin place” – a place where the boundary between earth and heaven seems to almost touch. And then he named the place – Bethel or “House of God.” But everything had changed. God had come to him and knowing his own character even Jacob was probably at a loss as to the reason why. But God’s coming meant that maybe there was a future for him, maybe in this moment he just couldn’t see it. But Jacob knew this, his life had changed and nothing would be the same again.

And now it was about to once more. The time that Jacob had been waiting for had finally arrived. It was time to go home, and that message came directly from God. Interestingly though, God does not introduce himself as the God of Abraham and Isaac – God wants a more personal moment with Jacob. So he introduces himself as the God of one of the major “watershed moments” in Jacob’ life. He told him, I am the God of Bethel.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 32

After Rachel gave birth to Joseph, Jacob said to Laban, “Send me on my way so I can go back to my own homeland. – Genesis 30:25

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 15, 2015): Genesis 30

I am Canadian. I can trace my family roots back through several generations who have lived in North America. The appearance of my ancestor with the Mullen surname seems to have arrived in New York from Ireland in the late 1700’s. But there are other ancestors in my family tree that I can trace back into the 1600’s – the earliest that I know of emigrated from the Netherlands to the United States within a generation after the arrival of the Mayflower in 1620.

I am Canadian. My ancestors arrived in Canada from the United States in the early 1800’s.  My family tree is a bit of a mess – there is a bit of everything to be found within its branches; Irish, Dutch, German and English among others. Half of my ancestors were probably at war with the other half several times during history. And yet … there is still something about our heritage.

I am Canadian. But if you ask me about my ethnic heritage I will likely tell you that I am Irish. After all, that is the origin of the Mullen name. I have a feeling that there might be more Irish in my heritage than anything else, although I can’t really prove that. But my allegiance is to Canada – after all, it is the country that I know. I have walked its hills and spent time on its streets. If I was forced to call some other place home, that some other place might be the green hills of Ireland, but I have never been there. I dream of someday being able to be visit, but as of yet that hasn’t happened. It is funny that we can sometimes identify ourselves with places that we have never visited. Among my acquaintances are Germans who have never been to Germany and Dutch who have never been to Holland. We seem to make connections with places we have never been simply because of the strength of our heritage. But when we have actually lived there, especially in our childhoods and then have moved away, the connection is even stronger – no matter how long it has been since we lived in that place.

Jacob had lived in Haran for fourteen years. He had married, and had children, he had tight family connections to Haran. It is where his ancestors had lived. And by this time Jacob knew that both of his parents had died, he had missed their funerals and all that was left for him in Canaan was a brother who hated him. And yet, Jacob also seemed to know that that was the place that he belonged. It was the place where he had spent his early years, the place where he had grown up. Ethnically Jacob was from Haran. But that was not his home – his home was Canaan, the land promised to his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac. And he was part of that heritage. And someday, if not today, Jacob would return home – to the country that he owed his allegiance. And no amount of time or money would ever be enough to change that.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 31

When Jacob saw Rachel daughter of his uncle Laban, and Laban’s sheep, he went over and rolled the stone away from the mouth of the well and watered his uncle’s sheep. – Genesis 29:10

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 14, 2015): Genesis 29

On February 2 of any year, a groundhog is removed from his burrow and forced to go outside and walk around outside while thousands of people look on. The Groundhog’s Day tradition says that if the groundhog sees his shadow, then we are in for six more weeks of winter. But if it is cloudy and the groundhog doesn’t see his shadow, then spring is coming early (admittedly, where I live, six more weeks of winter after February 2 is spring coming early, but that is beside the point.) The most famous groundhog is Punxsutawney Phil in Pennsylvania. And someone did a little checkup on Phil’s accuracy and found that he was right about 39% of the time (insert your favorite weatherman joke here). There are a couple of things that seem important to note. One, a coin would seem to have a better chance of predicting the weather than Phil, and two, why a groundhog? Why are we looking down at the ground to see whether or not the sun is shining? The answer, of course, is that for some reason it is more fun to watch Punxsutawney Phil walk around than it is to see a coin flipped or see me walk out of my house and check for my shadow. (However, a variant on the tradition where the President walks out of the White House on February 2 and wanders around the Front White House lawn, with the Secret Service in tow, and checks for his shadow might be a real crowd pleaser.) But essentially that is the only reason why Groundhog Day works; because it is fun. There is no other purpose.

And we get that, but not all traditions are so benign.  Some can be harmful. The five second rule for dropping that donut on the floor might work for mom’s clean kitchen, but you need to be careful where else you might exercise it. Germs have steadfastly refused to obey the tradition. I admit that I have never really felt bound by tradition. Being bound to something because we have always done it that way sounds to me like a stupid reason to do something. Having said that, if you do something twice, you have established a tradition. And if the tradition works, great. But if, for any reason, the tradition stops working, throw it away and find a new tradition.

It seems that at this well, Jacob has encountered a tradition. The reason for the tradition was probably rooted in the fact that the shepherds were young and that the rock was heavy. So to remove and replace the rock from in front of the well took several of the young shepherds to accomplish. And so the tradition of waiting for all of the sheep and shepherds to arrive at the well before removing the rock began. The tradition was practical and it worked.

But Jacob wasn’t a young boy. Some experts seem convinced that this incident is an act of superhuman strength caused by Jacob’s love (at first sight) for Rachel. But there is no real reason to assume that. Jacob was old enough to roll the stone away himself, and old enough to realize that the tradition, at least in this moment, wasn’t working. So he threw the tradition away in favor of the tradition that if someone at the well is strong enough – because they are old enough – to open the well, then the well can be opened

So Jacob opens the well and allows Rachel to bring her sheep to drink. Did Jacob intend to impress Rachel? Of course, that is exactly what Jacob was doing. And not only was this his intention, but it also worked. And that was all that mattered to Jacob.

Sometimes we need to examine our own traditions and make sure that they are still working. Too often in the church we treat our traditions as if they are the way that we get to Jesus. But the reality is that our Christian traditions at one time helped us to get to Jesus, and so we kept them. But if they stop working and we just aren’t having fun anymore, then we need to find new traditions that work. And that is all that should matter to us.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 30

Early the next morning Jacob took the stone he had placed under his head and set it up as a pillar and poured oil on top of it. He called that place Bethel, though the city used to be called Luz. – Genesis 28:18-19

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 13, 2015): Genesis 28

Inside the Crown Room of Edinburgh Castle, alongside the Crown Jewels of Scotland, sits a block of red sandstone. The rock has a name – it is called the Stone of Scone. The Stone of Scone has also been the called by another name, The Coronation Stone – and for centuries the monarchs of Scotland, England and Great Britain have been crowned while sitting on this rock. The Stone of Scone was last used on June 2, 1953, in the coronation ceremony of Queen Elizabeth II. And it will most likely be used next in the Coronation service of the King who will succeed her.

In 1296 the Stone was captured by Edward I as spoils of war and it was removed from Scotland and taken to Westminster Abbey. There the stone was fitted into a wooden chair, a chair that is known as King Edward's Chair, and it is on that chair that most of the subsequent English kings and queens have been crowned. But the stone had a long history before it was captured by Edward I, unfortunately that history is draped in mystery.

Obviously the Stone of Scone is no mere rock. Traditionally, the stone is thought to have been the very stone that Jacob placed under his head and then called Bethel, literally, the House of God. According to the story, the Stone was removed from Israel and carried to Ireland by the prophet Jeremiah. And from Ireland this valuable stone was moved to Scotland where it began to be used as a religious artifact in the crowning of Kings and Queens. It is a great story, but the truth is that the Stone of Scone is not the Stone of Jacob’s Bethel. It is simple red sandstone that was most likely mined somewhere right around Scone, Scotland. The Stone of Jacob was more likely to be limestone, a stone that is very common in the area of Bethel.

Unfortunately, Jacob’s actions at Bethel foretold an unfortunate story in that would take place in the Israel of the future. Jacob took the stone that he had used as a pillow and set it up as a memorial. That action was, and is, a common practice in the East. These stones remind people of the important events of the past. But Jacob didn’t just set up his stone, he poured oil on it, consecrating it for the use of God. Jacob made the stone an altar.

Later in the story of Genesis, God would call himself the “God of Bethel” when he is talking with Jacob, reminding him of this very moment. But even further into the future, after the division of Israel and Judah, the gods of Bethel would have nothing to do with the God of Israel. This stone that Jacob consecrated in this House of God, would become one of the main places where the false gods of Israel would be worshipped.

In the end, Jacob’s consecration of this place as the “House of God” is correct. But what Jacob missed was that this was not the only place where God dwelled. God had been with him every step of the way, and would go wherever he would go - and a God like that really had no use for this consecrated stone at Bethel.  

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 29

Esau said, “Isn’t he rightly named Jacob? This is the second time he has taken advantage of me: He took my birthright, and now he’s taken my blessing!” Then he asked, “Haven’t you reserved any blessing for me?” – Genesis 27:36

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 12, 2015): Genesis 27

Vladimir Putin’s accusation against the United States a couple of weeks ago, in the wake of the American charges that had been laid against FIFA officials for corruption, opens up an interesting question. Basically Putin’s argument is that the United States is meddling in the affairs of other nations. He does not say that there was no wrong doing, but rather that the wrong doing had nothing to do with the United States. Putin’s argument is that the United States is trying to extend its domain and enforce its morality over things that ultimately have nothing to do with Americans – which in his eyes is essentially a political and a moral problem.

And Putin’s argument, if true, makes sense (admittedly as I write this the role of the Swiss investigators does not seem to be entirely clear.) Essentially this conflict seems to be an extension of the debate the United States had with Russia over the 2014 Olympics in Sochi and the anti-gay laws that were in place there. And as the Global Community continues to get more and more intertwined, the question of jurisdiction will become more and more of an issue. Travellers are frequently warned about the challenge of obeying laws in other countries that may differ from that of their country of origin. And some countries may have what seem to be backward or morally outdated laws, some may even become havens for criminals who are trying to escape the laws of their own country. But when you travel to those countries, it is your responsibility to be aware of those laws. And to a certain extent, it is the country’s right to maintain and pass the laws that it sees as essential – not those who view the laws from the outside. The United States has the authority to enforce the laws that it has decreed on actions committed within its territory, unless the action contravenes an international law; and Russia has the same privilege. And any sovereign nation can also inhibit incoming guests from entering into their nation. In other words, the United States is fully within its rights to refuse travelling documents to any FIFA official who, in the eyes of the United States, is guilty of ongoing corruption. The problem is that such an action would likely be a death blow to international sports. It might be that the only real solution is in some sort of international court jointly deciding on what is correct behavior in sport, rather than one nation taking the initiative on their own, and outside of their jurisdiction.

Esau and Isaac are upset that Jacob has stolen the blessing that Dad wanted to give to his older son. Some experts have waded into this issue asserting that in the action of Esau selling of his birthright to Jacob for a pot of stew, Esau was clearly in the wrong. He was not tricked into it in any way, his appetites overruled his desire for the birthright. Besides, he essentially saw the birthright as being spiritual in nature, and about spiritual things Esau was not concerned.

But the blessing was different. The blessing had to do with the physical and the material world, and Esau was very concerned about that. The same experts that see Esau’s culpability in the trade of the birthright for a pot of stew, argue for Jacob’s guilt with regard to the stealing of the blessing. The problem is that they have fallen for the argument that Esau is trying to sell here – that the spiritual birthright and the material blessing are not in any way connected. There would seem to be a jurisdiction problem here that neither Esau nor Isaac have any control over. As much as Isaac would like to bless Esau, and as much as Esau would love to receive the blessing, both had actually been sold to Jacob on the day that Esau valued a pot of stew more than his inheritance from his father. How Jacob got the blessing is really immaterial. He already owned it and had jurisdiction over it, not because he stole it from his brother, but simply because, at that time, his brother saw no value in it.     

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 28

Isaac reopened the wells that had been dug in the time of his father Abraham, which the Philistines had stopped up after Abraham died, and he gave them the same names his father had given them. – Genesis 26:18

Today’s Scripture Reading (June 11, 2015): Genesis 26

So … hymns or choruses? Which side are you on? New music inside the church has never received an easy ride. I love the story of Isaac Watts and his journey into church music. He hated the music that had come before him, music that his father’s generation had faithfully sung. But in his mind, there was nothing in the old music to commend itself. And so his father issued a challenge to him. If you don’t like the music we sing, then write your own. (Admittedly, dear old dad was not much for conforming to tradition, and that was a sin that would land the Senior Watts in jail.) But the young Isaac Watts took up the challenge that had been handed to him with a vengeance. He wrote and wrote and wrote. Today our hymnals (those books that churches used to have that contained hymns [songs] in them and are now most likely stored in some storage space in the church) are filled with songs written by Isaac Watts, Including “Joy to the World” (which was never intended to be used a Christmas Carol), “Oh God Our Help in Ages Past” and “When I Survey the Wondrous Cross.”

But it sometimes surprises people that his hymn were not originally readily accepted by the church. One pastor went as far as to write a scathing letter to the editor of a paper about the new church music – and by new music he meant anything written by Isaac Watts. The pastor’s words could have been written by any number of people to complain today about music written by Chris Tomlin or Matt Redman (or a myriad of other modern hymn writers.) Here are his words –

There are several reasons for opposing it.  One, it’s too new.  Two, it’s often worldly, even blasphemous.  The new Christian music is not as pleasant as the more established style.  Because there are so many new songs, you can’t learn them all.  It puts too much emphasis on the instrumental music rather than Godly lyrics.  This new music creates disturbances making people act indecently and disorderly.  The preceding generation got along without it.  It’s a money making scene and some of these new upstarts are lewd and loose. (This letter was written in 1723.)

Okay, I get it. Isaac Watts writes bad music. Except that hundreds of years later we are still singing his songs – even in contemporary driven worship services.

I remember a quote from Rich Mullins, given shortly before he died tragically in 1997, commenting at how amazed he was that the church was still singing “Awesome God” – a song he had written years earlier. And yet almost two decades later we are still singing the song. If the question is why, maybe the answer is because the song speaks emotionally to us, as do songs written by Tomlin, Redman and their contemporaries – and as do the songs written in centuries past by people like Isaac Watts and more recently Fanny Crosby, or Bill and Gloria Gaither. They speak a message to our souls exactly in the place where our souls live.

So what does any of this have to do with our story of another Isaac. Isaac moves back into the same country that his father had inhabited years earlier. In the intervening time, the Philistines who inhabited the land had unceremoniously closed the wells that Abraham had dug. Maybe one of the most important things that we learn about this Isaac is that he seems to be a very mild mannered person. He doesn’t get upset that he is being moved around, or that the wells have been stopped. Instead, he simply works to correct the situation. And one of the first things he does when he moves back into the land of his father is open up the wells that had been dug by dad. Then he gives to them the same names that his father had given to them, rejoicing with each one of his father’s accomplishments. There is no indication that that is all he did. Some things had to be remade from scratch, they had to be new – but not everything.

I believe that there is a powerful illustration here of our own spiritual lives. The question that I started out with is actually a false one. The question can’t be either/or. It has to be both. The spiritual resources that have sustained generations past can still sustain us today – even the music falls into this category. In fact, not only can it sustain us, but it is important that we, in faith, allow it to feed into our lives. Yes, some of these resources might need to be reshaped and polished for today, but these spiritual resources are essential for our spiritual enrichment. But we also need what is good about the spiritual resources that are being developed today. Neither can be ignored. God has given to us not just one or the other, but both with the intention that these resources would be used for the building of his people – and that is us.      

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 27