Some time later, the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt offended their master, the king of Egypt. – Genesis 40:1

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 31, 2018): Genesis 40

On April 4, 1945, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was condemned to death. His crime was his association with Abwehr resistance, an outgrowth of the Abwehr German intelligence network. To be honest, Bonhoeffer never seemed overly comfortable in his relationship with the resistance movement. While he opposed the actions of the Fuhrer, his devotion to Christ and passive resistance was out of step with the other members of the resistance movement that had found fertile ground in the German Intelligence network.

Of course, it was the Abwehr resistance that was responsible for the July 20 Plot, a failed attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler. After the failed attempt, there was an increased pressure to find out who was responsible. In September 1944, secret Abwehr documents were found and arrests were made, including that of Dietrich Bonhoeffer

But on April 4, 1945, the diaries of the leader of Abwehr intelligence Agency, Admiral Wilhelm Canaris were discovered, and as Hitler read more of the Abwehr Intelligence’s connection with the July 20 Plot, the Fuhrer flew into a rage.

On April 5, 1945, Admiral Wilhelm Cannaris and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, along with deputy General Hans Oster, military jurist General Karl Sack and Ludwig Gehre, were led out of their cells at Flossenburg Concentration Camp naked. Here the men would be humiliated and executed by hanging. Cannaris maintained his innocence to the end, maintaining that what he had done, he had done in defence of Germany. Just two weeks later, American troops would arrive at the gates Flossenburg Concentration Camp, liberating those imprisoned there.

“Some time later” in this passage indicates that Joseph had been imprisoned for a while when two new prisoners were thrown into the prison with him. Although we are not given details of their crime (they “offended their master”) it is likely from their positions that there had been an attempt on the Pharaoh’s life. The two men were both responsible for handling the food of the king – the cupbearer was responsible for what the king drank and the baker for what he ate. Again, recognizing the occupations of the two being charged with the crime, it is likely that the assassination attempt involved some kind of poison.  

Even as a prisoner, Joseph had risen in his responsibility and authority, and it is likely this responsibility that brought Joseph into contact with the new prisoners and gave him the opportunity to hear their stories.

The story tells us that one would be released from prison and that the other would be executed, but it does not indicate the guilt or innocence of either of these men. But because of Joseph’s obedience, even this situation could be used to further the plans of God.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 41

No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” – Genesis 39:9

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 30, 2018): Genesis 39

William Faulkner in “As I Lay Dying” writes “People to whom sin is just a matter of words, to them salvation is just words too.” If our sin is hypothetical, then so too is our salvation. Within religions like Christianity, coming to that moment of our confession of what is wrong in our lives is important. We have to understand our sin beyond the words that we use to describe it. It has to be real. And in the moment that our sin becomes real, our salvation becomes real as well.

But the flip side is that means that there must be a difference in our actions. Our conviction and our morals are not supposed to be just words that pass through our lips. Admittedly, this has been the ultimate mistake of many Christian, leaders, teachers, and musicians. We can sing and talk about our convictions, but we often seem to struggle more than a little when it comes to living those convictions out in our lives – especially in those moments when we are alone, and no one is watching what it is that we are doing. Our moral convictions must make a difference in the way that we live and the things that we are willing to do, especially in those moments when we think that no one is watching. If that is not true, then our convictions are just words that carry no weight as we journey through this life. Our sin and our salvation is nothing more than words that we speak.

In many ways, here we begin to see the maturation of Joseph. At one point, Joseph was little more than a spoiled brat, the favorite of his father and the enemy of his brothers. But regardless of how much time had passed, it was a life that Joseph struggled to remember. He had been attacked by his brothers, sold into slavery, sold once again to an important man in Egypt, and had risen through the ranks in his master’s house to the point that there was no one else who was as important as he. And it seems that Joseph also recognized that his life could have been very different. And he was right. Each step of the way, God had led him, until this moment of conflict in his life.

The spoiled brat had also emerged from his experience with a deep sense of right and wrong. It was likely something that he had learned from his parents at a young age, but now he had internalized the moral direction so that it guided his actions, and not just his words. And in the face of temptation, he recognizes that violating his beliefs would not just be a sin against his master – it would be a sin against his God as well.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 40

There Judah met the daughter of a Canaanite man named Shua. He married her and made love to her … - Genesis 38:2

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 29, 2018): Genesis 38

Mahatma Gandhi is famous for saying “I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet.” He was not a man that was going to be moved away from the principles on which he based his life. I love the story of Gandhi arriving for a meeting with the King of England and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. When he was asked if he was planning on dressing up in a suit and tie for the occasion, Gandhi is reported to have replied that the King and the Prime Minister would wear enough suits to make up for his lack. He would dress as who he was; a simple man of the people and proud of his position and his country. Dress never makes a man; only the principles to which we hold fast has the power to do that.

While Jacob had gone back to find a wife among people who believed similarly to his upbringing and beliefs, just as his father had and desired that his sons would, increasingly we see the children of Jacob marrying the local woman in the area where dad had settled. And on its own, there is nothing wrong with that. The problem arose when these women began to lure the sons of Jacob away from God of Abraham and the God of the Promise and toward the local gods of the Canaanite people. The children of Jacob consistently became corrupted by the local women of Canaan who were devoted to false gods. This corruption became a barrier to the plan that God had for Israel.

But just as consistently, God had a plan to bring his people back to the plan that he had for them, and it involved removing them from the land that had been promised to them through Abraham. God had no intention of allowing his children to be corrupted; no intention in allowing the gods of these local women to walk through the minds of his people with their dirty feet.

I have openly wondered why Abraham, and the descendants of Abraham, would leave the land that God had promised to them. I still wonder about Abraham, but as far as his children are concerned, the answer to the question is that God was removing them from the land to clean off the dirty feet marks these false gods had made on their lives. In Egypt, the children of Jacob would be despised and isolated, and the corruption that was started through their marriages could be cleaned and healed. Four hundred years later, the land would welcome them back. Centuries later, corruption would once again necessitate their removal. But once again the land would welcome them back.

Four decades after the ministry of Jesus, the people would once again be removed. And it would be almost 1900 years before the land welcomed them back once more. But each time, the removal of Israel from the Promised Land gave them the opportunity to be brought back into an essential worship of the God who laid special claim on their lives – and cleaning the footprints off of their lives that had been left there by corrupt, dirty feet.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 39

When Reuben heard this, he tried to rescue him from their hands. “Let’s not take his life,” he said. “Don’t shed any blood. Throw him into this cistern here in the wilderness, but don’t lay a hand on him.” Reuben said this to rescue him from them and take him back to his father. – Genesis 37:21-22

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 28, 2018): Genesis 37

American Politician Bob Riley commented that “hard times don't create heroes. It is during the hard times when the 'hero' within us is revealed.” Maybe the discovery of a hero is much like someone who mines for jewels in the earth. The miner does not create the jewel, but rather reveals it among the much less valuable rocks that surround it. A hero who never experiences hard times remains hidden among the people, waiting for the moment that requires their action. So no one knows who the hero might be among us, until that moment when a hero is needed, and then we get to watch them step up. I suspect that the identity of the everyday heroes, with whom we spend our time, might surprise us. Those who we expect to be heroes might cower in fear when the situation calls for them to step up. And those who we would predict would cower in fear might step up. But the truth is that we will never know until that time of conflict is upon us.

Most of would probably argue that Joseph is the hero of this portion of the story arch dedicated to his exploits. But I am not sure that we would be right. If I am brutally honest, while many biblical experts call Joseph “a type of Christ” and often minimize his negative character defects, I have to admit that I cringe at the things that Joseph does early in his life. He is the favorite child of his father, something that his father either refuses or cannot hide, and as a result, he seems to become more of a spoiled brat than a hero in the making. Early in the story arch, Joseph is an insolent child that seems to enjoy lording his status over those of his brothers. There is no doubt that the circumstances of Joseph’s life will change him, and by the end of the story, he will be the hero. But as his story begins, he is not heroic in any way.

The hero of the early part of the story is someone that we rarely hear about in church. His name is Reuben. Reuben is the oldest of the children of Jacob. His mother is Leah, Jacob’s first wife, and the wife that Jacob most often seemed to reject. He is Joseph’s half-brother, whose mother was Dad’s favorite wife, Rachel. We should not minimize the effect that this kind of favoritism likely had on the boys.

Favoritism by dad, not just of his children, but also between their mothers, set-up a situation where jealousy between the brothers reached an epic level. Add to that jealousy the dreams and the apparent insolent and prideful attitude of Joseph, and it is not hard to see why the boys are about to turn on the dreamer. At this moment, Joseph’s brothers decide that they can kill Joseph and finally be rid of him. An extreme solution to their problem? Most definitely. But it is Reuben that steps in as the oldest brother and suggests a different path. His motive, we are told, is so that he could come back later and free his brother taking him back to his father. Deep down, he probably thought that the scare this incident would provoke in Joseph might do his little brother good. Of course, God had a different idea. 

So, in the end, the path to Israel’s Salvation involved the favoritism of a father, the insolent pride of a dreamer, the evil plans of nine brothers, and the efforts of an unexpected hero named Reuben to keep his brother alive. And, of course, the faithfulness of a God who put it all together.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 38

This is the account of the family line of Esau (that is, Edom). – Genesis 36:1

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 27, 2018): Genesis 36

And they all lived happily ever after. In North American culture, that is the preferred ending to every story. Well, maybe not. It has been noted that endings are what differentiates stories written in the United States from those written in Canada. Maybe it is the political situation or just another tale of the elephant and the mouse, but stories written in the United States more often end with some form of “and they lived happily ever after” than their Canadian counterparts. After all, the Elephant (United States) has more control over its future. Canada (the mouse), on the other hand, is often sent into terror every time the elephant burps. Okay, that might be an exaggeration, but you get the meaning. Everything that happens in the United States affects Canada, whether Canadians want it to or not. Put simply, Canada is too small and too close to the United States not to be affected by every wave that the United States creates. It is why Canada is interested in the politics of the United States. While they have no say, they will bear the brunt of what happens in Washington. Therefore, Canadians are not as in control of the future as their counterparts in the United States, a reality that is revealed in the ambiguous endings more often written in Canada. (Personal Note: I am trying not to use the word “Americans” to describe people from the United States. As almost every Canadian will tell you, they are Americans too – they are citizens of the North American continent.)

Genesis has a unique way of saying goodbye; they give us a lineage and tell us what is significant about the people born in this family line. It is the Genesian way of saying goodbye. The presence of this family account of Esau and Edom is a signal that the story is not going to go in this direction, but the authors of Genesis also attempt to provide a reason why this lineage is important. In the case of Esau, while the brothers did “kiss and makeup,” their descendants would be in conflict for much of their history together.

During the Greek and Roman dominance of the Middle East, Edom became known as Idumea. And maybe the most famous of the Idumeans were Herod the Great and his family. Much of the Jewish problem with Herod’s reign as King of the Jews stemmed from the fact that Herod was not a Jew; he was not a descendant of Jacob (Israel) but, rather, a descendant of Esau.

But during the first Jewish-Roman War, Edom supported their Jewish brothers. According to the Historian Josephus, 20,000 Idumeans fought with the Jews during the “Siege of Jerusalem” in 70 C.E.

And while Genesis provides an exit for the descendants of Esau here in Genesis 36, it is after the First Jewish-Roman War that history finally loses sight of the Edomites. Here they disappear. Their land will still be called Idumea for another few centuries, but the people make their final exit from the pages of history. Their fate is unknown, but most likely they were dispersed at this time among the other people of the earth.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 37

So Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem). – Genesis 35:19

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 26, 2018): Genesis 35

Not long ago, a good friend of mine argued that anyone who believes in the “Theory of Evolution” only has half a brain. I smiled at the barb. I am what might be called an evolutionary creationist, or maybe more to the point; I refuse to rule out the idea that evolution was a tool that God used in the creation of the world. The most important words in Genesis 1 are the opening ones – “In the beginning God created …” – anything else is open to debate. And, as far as I am concerned, neither the belief in a literal six-day creation, which I find incomprehensible, nor a belief that evolution was tool utilized by God, has any effect on our salvation. Creation vs. Evolution is nothing more than an argument by which we pass our time. I admit that I enjoy the argument, but being on either side of the argument does not disqualify any of us from being a Christian.

My response to my friend was “then we have to find a way to communicate the gospel to the eighty-five percent of people (it is probably higher) who have only half a brain.” I took the words spoken to me in jest; I hope that my friend understood my response in the same manner. But there is a deeper truth here than just the Creation vs. Evolution debate. Words have weight. I understand that, and yet I also have to admit that too often, words get away from me – and maybe also away from my friend. I often wish that I could be more silent. As a teacher, I understand that there are times when we have to speak the truth, but I also understand that we need to be careful that we do not phrase those words in an offensive way; or maybe that we do not allow hyperbole run away with our words.

In many ways, the conclusion of Rachel life was a fulfillment of words that had been spoken. Rachel had demanded of Jacob that he give her children or she would die. In the end, both were true. Rachel would give birth to two sons, Joseph and Benjamin, and would die in the process of giving birth to her youngest son.

But more than that, Rachel’s death could be attributed to the curse that Jacob spoke over his family during his father-in-law’s search for some missing family idols. Maybe the words were unwise, because words have weight, and there is no doubt that Jacob did not really mean what he said. But here are his words:

Jacob answered Laban, “I was afraid, because I thought you would take your daughters away from me by force. But if you find anyone who has your gods, that person shall not live. In the presence of our relatives, see for yourself whether there is anything of yours here with me; and if so, take it.” Now Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen the gods (Genesis 31:31-32).

So Rachel gives birth to Benjamin and dies in the process, fulfilling the misspent words of Jacob. And with her death begins our strange, but wonderful journey, into Bethlehem Ephrath.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 36

Now Dinah, the daughter Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the women of the land. When Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, the ruler of that area, saw her, he took her and raped her. – Genesis 34:1-2

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 25, 2018): Genesis 34

As a society, we have developed an unhealthy accusation we call “blaming the victim.” Blaming the victim usually involves somehow blaming the one who is hurt by a criminal act for the crime. It is unhealthy because we all have some responsibility for our own safety. Whenever a crime is committed, while we understand that we are not at fault for the crime, the question that remains is this; is there something that I could have done to have prevented what happened?

It is a struggle to talk about the story of the sexual violation of Dinah without, in some way, blaming the victim. So let’s start by saying that a crime was committed against Dinah by Shechem. There is no excuse for the action of Shechem; he is clearly at fault. There is no way that the rape of Dinah should in any way be rationalized away, even though that is exactly what happens in the story.

But there are some other elements to the story to which we need to pay attention. First, the story takes place in an urban area. And in this area, unsupervised women were often preyed upon by the men of the city. Jacob and Leah failed by allowing Dinah to go out unaccompanied to explore the city and visit with the women who lived there. Promiscuity in the area was not just common, but it was part of the pagan religion to which the city clung. There was an understanding among the people that a rape could be committed and then settled with a financial arrangement with the family after the fact. All of this should have served as a warning against the family of Jacob allowing Dinah to go out alone. We understand Dinah’s desire, but it was an unwise action to take.

But maybe even more to the point, Jacob was not supposed to be in the city. God had told him to go to Bethel, but Jacob had wanted to be close to the city. It was because of Jacob’s desire to build his new life close to the urban area that the family purchased land in sight of the city. If Jacob had followed God’s instructions, then the violation of Dinah probably would not have happened.

I understand that all of this falls under the category of blaming the victim, but somewhere inside of us, there has to be a realization that our choices often come with foreseeable consequences. Given the circumstances, the violation of Dinah was something might have been predicted and, therefore, prevented. But none of this excuses Shechem. Shechem is clearly in the wrong. In a world dominated by good, Dinah should have been safe exploring the city on her own. But that is, unfortunately, not the world in which we live. And this is the reason why parents have to set limits on their children. The children often believe that they are bulletproof and that no harm will come to them. But to allow them to explore this world without our guidance means too often that they will find their way into disaster. The consequences that they may suffer might not be because of their sin, but it also might be something that could have been prevented if we had prepared for that eventuality.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 35

Please accept the present that was brought to you, for God has been gracious to me and I have all I need.” And because Jacob insisted, Esau accepted it. – Genesis 33:11

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 24, 2018): Genesis 33

Author Robert Jordan argues that there is a basic difference between the sexes when it comes to forgiveness. “Any fool knows men and women think differently at times, but the biggest difference is this. Men forget, but never forgive; women forgive, but never forget.” There does seem to be a difference in the way that the sexes receive offense. Men seem to get angry, maybe easier than women, but the anger also seems to blow past quickly, unless we are continually reminded of the offense. But Jordan might not be quite right. Men might forget but never forgive. But sometimes I wonder that if we remember the offense too vividly if we will ever actually forgive the offense. The result might be that true forgiveness is a rare occurrence in our human dealings with each other. Forgiveness might be an act that we have to address directly and offer freely. And once we have truly forgiven, then maybe the only merciful thing left is to forget.

As Jacob and Esau reunite, it might be easy to assume that Esau, at least, is a typical man. While Jacob has stewed over the upcoming meeting with his brother, it seems that Esau has forgotten the offense. He is happy to be reunited with this brother and to meet for the first time nephews and nieces that he was unaware he possessed.

But there is also an element of ritual forgiveness that is being played out in this scene between the two brothers. The gifts given by Jacob were a ritualistic acknowledgment of Jacob’s sin toward his brother. They were also a request that his brother views him as a friend.

Maybe Esau’s initial refusal of the gifts was a way of being polite. Maybe the sins that had been committed between the two brothers so long ago now seemed inconsequential to Esau, and he saw no need to accept the penitential offering now being offered by Jacob. But this meeting could not end without Esau’s acceptance of the offering. Jacob needed to know that his apology had been accepted, and that knowledge could not come just in the form of words. Forgiveness would be made tangible when Esau received the gifts that Jacob offered to him.

And in this culture, no one ever received a gift from an enemy. To receive a gift meant that you considered the giver of the gift, your friend. And this is something that Jacob desperately needed to believe was true. The reception of the gift meant that Jacob and Esau were not just brothers, but rather, that they were also friends.  

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 34

But you have said, ‘I will surely make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted.’” – Genesis 32:12

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 23, 2018): Genesis 32

We are a people of faith. What we have faith in sometimes differs, but we still have faith. Some of us place our faith in education. We believe that a higher education is necessary for us to have the life for which we dream. And in Western Society, it is becoming harder and harder to get a job without at least a basic High School education. It was not that long ago that people could be quite successful without completing High School. But the chances of that happening today are greatly reduced. For every teen that wonders why they have to stay in school, the reality is that they will be struggling with poverty for the rest of their lives if they don’t. So maybe it is okay to put our faith in education.

Others place their faith in the idea of hard work. If they can work hard enough, they can become successful. With hard work, they can overcome their deficiencies in other areas. Jon Bon Jovi in his song “Save the World” writes it this way –

              I never went to college; I don't have a degree

Let's say I went to night school
I learned all I know on the streets  

I wasn't born a rich man; I ain't got no pedigree
The sweat on this old collar
That's my Ph.D.

The idea is that if I can work hard enough, I can be a success, even if I don’t have the advantages of other people. The truth is probably somewhere between these two ideals. It is rare that either hard work or education is enough to make us successful.

Jacob was a man who seemed to understand all of this. He never really comes across as a traditional man of faith, someone who has placed his faith in God. He is a man with a pedigree; after all, he is the son of Isaac and the grandson of Abraham. Those names likely meant something in his world. Abraham and Isaac appear to be men of some wealth, which would have been passed on to their children.

But Jacob was also shrewd. Some might want to use a less politically correct word, but let’s stay with shrewd. He is not beyond taking advantage of people, even people with whom he is related – consider, for instance, his complicated relationship with Esau, who he is now going to meet once again after stealing the blessing that was rightfully his, and his father-in-law Laban of whom Jacob, although in a way that should not have worked, took advantage.

There is no doubt that Jacob is hard working. But now, Jacob is scared. Everything that he has, much of it stolen in some way or another, from other people, is in danger of being taken away from him. And so he prays. He becomes a man of faith who places his trust in God, about whom before this; it seems that he rarely thinks. His prayer is a simple one. “God save me.” God you made promises to me. The reality that Jacob does not want to think about is that the promises of God could have been fulfilled without Jacob surviving the coming battle. Jacob has prospered, and his children already number more than that Abraham and Isaac combined, who also received the promise that their descendants would be too numerous to count. Jacob has already received everything that God has promised to him.

But Jacob wants more. His prayer is filled with that request. It is a request that what he already possesses would be kept safe, but that he would be safe as well. Jacob is a man with a pedigree who is shrewd and works hard, and who now in the midst of his great fear seems to have a blossoming faith in God. 

So, does this make him a man of faith? Maybe. I love George Muller’s response when he was asked what the most important part of prayer was. The 19^th-century evangelist replied “The fifteen minutes after I have said, ‘Amen.’” Faith in God is not revealed in how we pray, but rather how we live once the prayer is finished.

For Jacob, what happens next is important.  

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 33

Then Rachel and Leah replied, “Do we still have any share in the inheritance of our father’s estate? – Genesis 31:14

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 22, 2018): Genesis 31

In June 2018, Erick Erickson, a politically conservative American blogger, argued that as our culture becomes more secular, people do not necessarily move away from religion, but rather allow other things, like politics, to fulfill their religious needs. And the problem with that is that religions, like Christianity, come with a concept of grace which is completely absent in politics. In politics, the only aim is to beat the other. Maybe the bottom line is that, while we might attempt to fill our religious needs with things like politics, the two cannot replace each other because they have very different aims. (Although I have to admit in a world that seems to be more and more divided, introducing the religious concept of grace into politics seems to be a welcome addition.)

The other factor is that it shifts allegiances. Politically, we want what is best for the party that we support, something that, with the loss of civility in American politics, is becoming more and more apparent. Our allegiance is to a particular shade of our nations. So, again in the current political environment, people who do not agree with us politically are shouted down or asked to leave restaurants. (On a personal note, politically I am a conservative, and in an even more narrow view, I am a fiscal conservative, but I have also found that I have not been able to support North American conservative policies either in the United States or Canada. As a result, I have been shouted down over social media from the conservative supporters. It has been a new experience.

But I am a Christian. And as a follower of Christ, my political affiliation is secondary. Religion, and for me especially Christianity, asks us to lift up our gaze and see what is best for this world, which we believe has a divine origin. Our allegiance to Christ means that we look beyond political affiliation or even our nationalism, to something that extends beyond our differences. We are all the creations of Christ. And we might have political views, but religion means that our allegiance has shifted.

There is a very real way in which the question of Leah and Rachel is fundamentally wrong. Their allegiance should have shifted. Maybe the question is born from their situation in which they are married to Jacob, but still living in the political realm of their father. But they are no longer in the house of their father. They are in the house of Jacob. They have left the gods of Nahor behind in favor of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their inheritance now lives with Jacob, and not their father, Nahor.

Religiously, we too leave the houses of our political inclinations and respond to the call of God on our lives. And there we hear a call that is both more macro and micro on our lives. We see how God works within the world in which we live, devoid of political and national borders, and we see how God moves in the lives of people from differing political stripes. And there we find the grace to come together and talk with each other, forgiving each other for our transgressions.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 32

She became pregnant and gave birth to a son and said, “God has taken away my disgrace.” – Genesis 30:23

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 21, 2018): Genesis 30

We all have things that we don’t like about ourselves. Plastic Surgeons can buy big houses because of our insecurity and our need to fix something about ourselves. But the terrible truth is that if we are not comfortable with who we are, there is very little that we can change about our lives, whether it is through the work of a plastic surgeon, or a job, or more money, that will make us comfortable with who we are.

Rachel lived in a world where it often seemed that the purpose of a woman was to bear children. And Rachel could not give Jacob any children. Therefore she could not fulfill what the culture believed was her purpose. And because of this lack, Rachel was not comfortable with who she was; she believed that she had not fulfilled her duty as the wife of Jacob. What is interesting about Rachel is that, like Sarah, her husband’s grandmother, from everything that we know about the marriage of Jacob and Rachel it appears that their relationship was strong. Rachel seemed to be the only woman that Jacob wanted, and probably the only woman that Jacob ever wanted. But Jacob’s unconditional love was not enough for Rachel.

So Rachel follows in the steps of Sarah and asks Jacob to sleep with her servant. It was a culturally acceptable solution, but the solution had failed for Sarah. Maybe Rachel didn’t know that side of the story, but the culturally acceptable solution had only increased the failure that Sarah believed herself to be.

We don’t have a similar story about Rachel and her servant, except this statement after Rachel gives birth to her first son, Joseph. Finally, she believed that God had removed her disgrace. So that meant that once again the culturally acceptable solution and the children born to Rachel’s servant was no more successful at making Rachel feel whole than Sarah was made whole by the birth of Ishmael to her servant, Hagar.

So, maybe the question is - Did the birth of Joseph really erase Rachel’s shame and make her feel better about herself? And that is a question that we really can’t answer. But, if Rachel’s life was anything like ours, my guess is that it didn’t; at least, not completely. Because if we are not comfortable with who we are, no external circumstance will make us feel comfortable with who we are.    

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 31

She conceived again, and when she gave birth to a son she said, “This time I will praise the LORD.” So she named him Judah. Then she stopped having children. – Genesis 29:35

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 20, 2018): Genesis 29

A traditional Tibetan saying argues that 'Tragedy should be utilized as a source of strength.' In trying to explain the saying, Tenzin Gyatso, the 14^th Dalai Lama, says that “No matter what sort of difficulties, how painful experience is, if we lose our hope, that's our real disaster.” Giving in to tragedy is to finalize its effect on us. There can be no recovery, even if life continues because all that is left is the bitterness left by the tragedy.

So in June 2018, a Hong Kong woman killed her parents and then committed suicide because she suffered from eczema. Eczema is an extremely annoying skin condition that has been linked to mental health issues. Eczema can be the cause of a loss of social contact, loneliness, depression, and anxiety. In her suicide note, she explained that having children and passing on eczema to the next generation was cruel. Her skin condition was a tragedy, but that she lost all hope was the real disaster. 

There is a deep tragedy in the biblical story of Jacob and Leah. All Leah wants is for her husband Jacob to want her and to love her. All Jacob wants is Leah’s sister Rachel. And so a relationship of bitterness develops between Leah and Rachel. Leah is producing heirs for Jacob, something that up until this point Rachel has been unable to do. And Leah believes, in the deepest part of her being, that the producing of heirs for Jacob will earn his love. And yet, with the birth of each child, her dream of being loved by her husband drifts farther and farther away.

And Rachel possesses the love that Leah wants. And yet it is Leah who is having the children that Rachel wants. But after the fourth child, Leah stops having children. We are not told why, but we are given this tantalizing comment that she named him Judah as her commitment to praise the Lord, who had been with her throughout all of the loneliness and tragedy of her life.

But why did the children stop? It is possible that Leah, in her depression, stopped welcoming Jacob’s advances. Leah was in pain and Jacob was unwilling to do anything to try and ease that pain. And so the tragedy of Leah’s unfulfilled need to be loves becomes the disaster of Leah’s acceptance of this reality. She would live out the rest of her days as the unloved first wife of Jacob. And in her mind, it is quite possible that she wondered if she shouldn’t have been allowed to live out her days as an unmarried daughter in the house of her father.

Leah might have been done having children, but God was not done with Leah. In fact, it would be from the descendants of Leah the unloved, and not Rachel the loved, that God would bring the brightest hope for Israel and the world. First in a King named David, the descendant of Leah’s last son Judah, and then in a Messiah named Jesus, also descended from Judah, who would bring light and love to a world that was condemned to live in great darkness. This was Leah’s gift. She would be unloved, but her child would lead our world toward a love that his ancestor Jacob would never give and that Leah would never receive.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 30

May he give you and your descendants the blessing given to Abraham, so that you may take possession of the land where you now reside as a foreigner, the land God gave to Abraham. – Genesis 28:4

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 19, 2018): Genesis 28

The 6^th – 5^th century B.C.E. philosopher Confucius argued that you should “Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.” The argument seemed to be that the weapon, by itself, was useless. A master swordsman understood the dance of battle. If a warrior possessed a sword but did not possess the necessary grace of movement to use the sword, then the sword would not only be a waste, but it would most likely also be lost. If a man cannot dance, he will never be of any use on the battlefield.

I think we intuitively understand and follow the instructions of Confucius as we live our lives. We want to give our gifts to the ones who have the capacity, and the will, to do the most with it. We want to give our swords to the ones who know how to dance.

And then we are confronted with the story of Isaac and his sons. Using the analogy of Confucius, it quickly becomes apparent that no one in this story has any idea of how to dance. No one has acted worthy of the blessing of Abraham. Isaac has openly thwarted the desire of God by intending to pass the blessing on to Esau even though God had declared that Jacob would be the recipient. Esau had rebelled against the will of God through his marriages, following the lusts of his desires rather than the wishes of his parents. Rebekah has instigated a fraud against her husband and eldest son. Jacob has lived up to his name as the “one who deceives.” None of the four major players of the story have acted in a way worthy of the blessing of God. And yet … Jacob will still receive it, and God will still move through this family who has forgotten how to dance. And God’s blessing will still make an impact on the world, just as it was designed to have.

To be honest, when I look at the contemporary church, I still see a people who can’t dance. And yet, God’s grace covers us, and he works through us. The result is that we are a blessing on the world. Our critics make a lot about our inability to dance. And they should. Sometimes we are not the best ambassadors for Christ. And yet, the hungry are fed, and the poor are valued, and the grace of God, at least at times, flows through us. There is no doubt that we can do better. But God continues to give his sword to people who can’t dance just as he did in the time of Isaac, Rebekah, Esau, and Jacob.

Now, if we could only learn to dance and be worthy of the sword that God gives to us. If we could, then grace and love would transform the world in which we live. And honor would be brought to God of all grace.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 29

Now then, get your equipment—your quiver and bow—and go out to the open country to hunt some wild game for me. Prepare me the kind of tasty food I like and bring it to me to eat, so that I may give you my blessing before I die.” – Genesis 27:3-4

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 18, 2018): Genesis 27

Shania Twain released her hit single “That Don’t Impress Me Much” on December 15, 1998. Soon after the release of the song, I was on a bus with a group of teens, and some of the young girls were singing along with the Twain’s then-new hit single. In the song, Twain remarks about things that don’t impress her, like intelligence and cars and apparently “movie star looks.” At one point in the song, she remarks -

Okay, so you're Brad Pitt
That don't impress me much
So you got the looks but have you got the touch
Don't get me wrong, yeah I think you're alright
But that won't keep me warm in the middle of the night
That don't impress me much

The truth and intent of the song, that looks are a passing thing and that there are other things more valuable in a relationship, were lost on the young teenage girls who were traveling on the bus. At this point in the song, they sang “That does impress me much” and then broke into uncontrollable laughter that lasted throughout the rest of the chorus.

We are an impressionable people. Some things make an impression on us, and maybe make us do silly things. What might impress us varies from person to person, but all of us are impressed by something.

Isaac was impressed by Esau. Esau seemed to be a man’s man. He was good with the bow and successful in his pursuit of game. In fact, it becomes apparent as the story is told that it is not the taste of the food that impresses Isaac. Evidently, at this point in his life, Isaac can’t tell the difference between the game caught by Esau and the lamb prepared by Jacob. But Isaac wants a son that is skilled in the hunt. Esau was skilled in this way, and Jacob was not. Isaac liked that about his older son so much that he was willing to disregard the directives of God. God had already made it clear the line of blessing would follow Esau’s younger twin brother, Jacob. But Isaac was determined to give his blessing to Esau, in spite of the plan of God.

The temptation to chase after what impresses us instead of what impresses God is something that shapes us still today. Too often we go down wrong paths because we are impressed by things that have left God unimpressed. To have his heart means that we want to be impressed by what impresses him. We want to see with his eyes, as we act as his hands and feet in the world.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 28

When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite. They were a source of grief to Isaac and Rebekah. – Genesis 26:34-35

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 17, 2018): Genesis 26

I have never really believed that romantic love has the power to “complete” us. For me, it is a Hollywood notion that long ago wore out its welcome. If we see ourselves as incomplete people waiting for someone to come along and complete us, then we will always be incomplete. The only way that we can build healthy marriages, and healthy relationships of any kind, is if we are comfortable in our own skin. That does not mean that there are not growth areas and things that we would like to change about ourselves, but that kind of fixing can only happen from within. Being in a relationship with someone is never the answer to “completing” or “fixing” us.

Having said that, I do believe that marriages, and relationships of any kind, with the wrong person can break us. Our relationships are more likely to bring us down to the level of our partners than they are able to raise us up to their level. There is truth in the idea that we reflect the character and ideals of the people with whom we spend our time. And I have to admit that I have met with people who are getting married and my first reaction has been “this is going to be a train wreck.” I wouldn’t actually tell them that, people in love rarely listen, but usually I am right.

Esau got married at the age of forty, and apparently not just to one woman, but two. There is so much that was wrong with Esau relationships with these women. First, he was a polygamist. Usually the fact that he married two women in such a short period of time, along with other facts from the story of Esau’s life of which we are aware, reveal that Esau had a problem with his passions. Esau’s passions ruled him, not the other way around. It is for this reason that the author of Hebrews labels Esau as “sexually immoral” (Hebrews 12:16).

Second, Esau was impatient. His marriage seems to have been done without the support of his family. It seems likely that Isaac wanted to make sure that Esau was married to a girl with a proper pedigree, one whose beliefs matched those of the family of Isaac and Rebekah. Abraham had arranged for such a marriage for Isaac. And Isaac, would do the same for Jacob, and it is understood that he would have liked to do the same for Esau. From a modern perspective, getting married at the age of forty does not seem impatient, but when reading the Bible, we have to remember that numbers need to be treated differently. The number forty in Hebrew thought indicates a time of transition and change. Esau may have been much younger than forty when he got married, but the use of the number forty simply indicates that there was a change in Esau’s life, which is very true. This comment about Esau’s marriages is the beginning of the story of Esau losing the blessing from Isaac that was rightfully his. Changes to the life of Esau were coming.

Third, Esau’s wives were going to lead Esau into sin. The Jewish Targums all agree that Esau’s wives worshiped different gods than Isaac and his family, and would lead him into idolatry; they were proud and would lead Esau into believing that he knew what was best, disregarding the admonitions of God; and his wives were disobedient, tarnishing the image of Esau and his family.

And through all of this, Isaac and Rebekah grieved for their son. They had wanted so much more.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 27

Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east. – Genesis 26:5-6

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 16, 2018): Genesis 25

Are you your parent's favorite child? I know, it is a weird question to ask. And yet it seems to be a common theme of life. I don’t think that there is a parent that I have ever spoken to who would admit to having a favorite child, we love our children equally. However, the subject seems to come up frequently when I am speaking with the children. According to what I hear the children say, I would have to guess that a lot of us feel like we are the Black Sheep of the family and that one of our siblings was the favorite.

Part of this is likely just the “grass is always greener on the other side of the fence” phenomenon, but it shapes us in unexpected ways. People who seem to feel that they are the experts on every subject, usually seem to have felt that they needed to know things as children to get any recognition from their parents. Rebellion is often the result of feeling like they can’t measure up, so why try. But then there are the stories of the Bible. Here there is no misunderstanding available. Men of the Bible had favorite wives, and parents had favorite children.

This verse has caused a bit of confusion. The only women that we know of who could have been considered Abraham’s concubine was Hager, the mother of Ishmael. The other two women in Abraham’s life were his wives, Sarah, and then after Sarah’s death, Keturah. If there were other concubines, we do not have any record of who they might have been. We also have no indication that Abraham’s relationship with Hagar lasted longer than the attempt to provide a male heir for Abraham. Sarah’s jealousy of Hagar over the birth of Ishmael would seem to have made that impossible. And yet there were a total of seven sons born to the concubines of Abraham and one son who was born to his wife, Sarah.

The easiest solution to the problem is to assume that the six boys mentioned in this passage were born to Keturah. If that is true then, while Abraham married Keturah, she was never placed in the mind of Abraham equal to Sarah. And the story of Abraham may also reveal what could be considered to be the first prenuptial agreement. While Keturah would be Abraham’s wife, neither she nor her children would stand to inherit anything from the Patriarch. Abraham would be generous with them throughout his life, but when he died, everything would go to Isaac. Isaac was the son of the promise, and nothing could be allowed to change that.

Abraham also began a family tradition of choosing favorite sons. He chose Isaac. Isaac would choose Esau. Ironically, Isaac’s choice was away from God who had chosen Jacob to be the next son of the promise. And Jacob would choose Joseph and Benjamin as his favorites, the only sons of his favorite wife, Rachel. And along with the tradition of favorite children came a tradition of dysfunction that was revealed in both the families of Isaac and Jacob, because the choosing of favorites is often damaging to both the favorite and the ones overlooked. But that is another story.

 Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 26

And she added, “We have plenty of straw and fodder, as well as room for you to spend the night.” – Genesis 24:25

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 15, 2018): Genesis 24

Over the past few years, I have become certain that we have read the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, as well as the partner story of Gibeah (Judges 19), wrong. I am not saying that whatever you might believe about same-sex sexual activity is necessarily wrong.  On that issue, I choose to withhold my judgment. But we cannot use the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the story of Gibeah, as proof to the wickedness of a same-sex lifestyle. That is reading into the story facts that simply are not there, no matter how much we might want them to be. The twin stories of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Gibeah, are about hospitality, not same-sex sexual interaction. The crisis present in the story is that two visitors come to Sodom, and later to Gibeah, in search of a place to sleep. In both stories, the people of the towns are xenophobic; they fear the stranger. The threatened same-sex rape in both stories is instituted as ways to keep unwanted strangers from stopping by their towns. Sodom was not populated by same-sex attracted males. It was populated by men who wanted to punish any visitors who chose to visit the town. In the case of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the story of the destruction of the cities is preceded by a wonderful example of hospitality extended to these same visitors by Abraham. The opposition of these two stories is purposeful. Abraham extended the proper hospitality that was required by the situation. The men of Sodom did not.

In the ancient world, hospitality was incredibly important. There were no hotels in which to stop. If one had to travel, for whatever reason, they did so only with the help of the strangers that they would meet along the way. The practice was understood. I will help you on your travels because one day I might need the help of a stranger to assist me.

Abraham had sent his servant to find a wife for his son. The servant did not want to find just any woman but needed to know that the child possessed the necessary characteristics to make a good wife for Isaac. One of those characteristics would have been that she was trained in the practice of hospitality. When Rebekah gave him water and offered to water his animals, she passed one of the first tests of hospitality. When the servant asked her if there might be a room in her father’s house for him stay, it was the second hospitality test. The servant understood that how Rebekah reacted to a stranger is important, especially if Abraham was going to become the father of a mighty nation.

Hospitality has become an awkward behavior in a world dominated by social media, and one where we seem to want to live in an echo chamber of our own closely held beliefs. We have not reached the evil levels of Sodom, Gomorrah, and Gibeah, but a quick glance at how we treat the stranger in our midst, the immigrant, or the Sikh, Muslim, and Buddhist, should tell us that we have taken the first steps toward their evil behavior. We no longer need to depend on the hospitality of strangers to travel, but the practice of welcoming the stranger into our midst is still important, at least it is if we want to follow in the steps of Jesus.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 25

Abraham agreed to Ephron’s terms and weighed out for him the price he had named in the hearing of the Hittites: four hundred shekels of silver, according to the weight current among the merchants. – Genesis 23:16

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 14, 2018): Genesis 23

British philosopher Alan W. Watts argues that “we seldom realize … that our most private thoughts and emotions are not actually our own. For we think in terms of languages and images which we did not invent, but which were given to us by our society.” Language and the customs of the society, things that we expended no effort to create, are the guiding rails of our thoughts and actions. We think and act within that cultural understanding. And even when we violate one custom, it is usually so that we can act through another.

With some religions, it is a common understanding that we should not take advantage of our brothers and sisters within the religion, but that those who exist outside of the faith boundary are fair game. In fact, in many cultures, it is expected that the stranger would be cheated in some way. Often, the tourist trade is built around this understanding. You will probably never see the stranger again, so it does not matter whether or not you treat them honestly. So often the message is that we need to be careful in our business dealings when it comes to intercultural trade, and honest when it comes to dealing with people who speak our culture language. The idea of buyer beware, at least in some cultures, is a warning about intercultural dealings.

Abraham and Ephron the Hittite are engaged in a cultural dance that was generations in the making. From their interaction, it is understood that Ephron believed that Abraham was a rich man and that he too was wealthy. This dance was not one between economically diverse parties, which made the rules of the dance appropriate for these the two men.

First, Ephron offers the land for free, knowing that the offer will be, according to the cultural language, refused. Abraham follows the cultural norms, he refuses the gift and requests a price. Ephron then replies with what is essentially the starting price. Like most products where haggling is expected, the starting price is very high. Ephron expects that Abraham would offer a lower price, and the haggling over the land would have begun.

But, here Abraham exits the cultural dance. Maybe it is because he is in mourning for his wife. Maybe Abraham understands that everything has been given to him by God, and God can do whatever he wants with his wealth. It is apparent that Abraham has no fear of being seen as weak in the negotiation. He has probably has been involved in enough dealings in the area that he knows Ephron understands him to be is a shrewd businessman. But here, Abraham is unwilling to haggle.

And so he pays the exorbitant price for the field. If there was one thing that Abraham wanted Ephron to understand, it was that times of stress would bring out the best and not the worst of the man of God. As an act of remembrance for his late wife Sarah, Abraham would act generously, and in this way set the example for all God-fearers who would read the story, and understand the cultural implications.  

 Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 24

The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, “I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son … Genesis 22:15-16

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 13, 2018): Genesis 22

Sometimes we see the world emotionally. Maybe that is why we find that poetry and music have the intense ability to speak to us. They help us to encounter the world around us with our emotions instead of our senses. And the reality is that emotional truth is real truth for each one of us.

Maybe that explains Donald Trump better than anything else that I can write. He encounters the world emotionally. He speaks of the world in hyperbole, which is essentially the tool of poetry and our emotions. And so everything is the best, or the worst, which are the expressions of our emotions. I get frustrated when he speaks of immigration and says that “The Democrats,” those lowly servants of the evil empire, want to throw the doors open and welcome everyone into the beckoning arms of the United States. My problem is that I have never heard anyone say that there should be no limits to immigration, nor has any commander in chief ever proposed that, but then again I am speaking logically and not emotionally. Emotional language is never precise. It exaggerates freely in its effort to get the message across.

Here the angel of the Lord speaks emotionally. If I attempt to encounter this passage with logic and rationality, then the truth is that the angel lied. Did you catch the lie as you read the passage? I have to admit that I missed it until now. Here is the lie; Isaac is not the only son of Abraham. Ishmael is also the son of Abraham. Granted, Isaac is the son of promise and Isaac is the only son of Abraham’s beloved wife Sarah, but he is not the only son of Abraham.

And there would be other sons of other wives. But at this moment, Abraham has two sons, and the angel speaks emotionally about Isaac, calling him the only son. Isaac is the son that Abraham cares the most about, he is the one who God had promised and the one who would carry the promise of God forward. He was not the only son, but emotionally he may very well have been. Neither Ishmael nor the future sons of Abraham would ever take the place of Isaac, which meant that the possible sacrifice of Isaac was the hardest one for Abraham to make.

Critics have often asked how Abraham could even consider sacrificing his son. Traditionally, Rabbi’s have responded that such was Abraham’s faith. He knew that in the end, God would have another plan. By faith, he knew that there would be another sacrifice, or that Isaac would be raised from the dead after the sacrifice. After all, God had said that the promises made to Abraham would be continued through Isaac. If that was to happen, Isaac had to live. Abraham had faith that somehow God would find a way. He heard the emotional voice of God, not the rational one, and in faith believed that God saw a path forward that Abraham could not see.

He is still a God who continues to find a way – and one who is still willing to speak to us emotionally.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 23

Sarah said, “God has brought me laughter, and everyone who hears about this will laugh with me.” – Genesis 21:6

Today’s Scripture Reading (July 12, 2018): Genesis 21

Robert Frost insisted that “If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane.” We need to laugh. We need to see the lighter side of life. When we don’t, things go terribly wrong. Reports emerged from the G7 meeting last month (June 2018) which make me want to laugh or cry. Laughing might be the healthier choice. Stories like the one where President Donald Trump tosses Starburst candies at German Chancellor Angela Merkel adding the comment “Don’t say I never give you anything” cause concern. I hope somebody laughed when it happened and celebrated the absurdity of the moment. Hopefully someday, looking back on the events of June 2018 G7 conference, we will be able to find the humor in the situation.

Originally, Sarah scoffed at the suggestion that she would bear a child in her old age. She didn’t believe that such a thing was possible. She laughed. And the angel who brought the message heard the laugh of Sarah. He repeated his prophecy of Sarah impending pregnancy and added that Abraham and Sarah would name their newborn son Isaac, a name which means “He laughs.” It was a gentle admonition that reflected Sarah’s unbelief.

But now, as Isaac is born, Sarah turns the name into an expression of joy. His name is Isaac because God has brought me laughter. And when my friends hear that an old woman has given birth to a son, they will laugh with me. The idea that a child could come from me is absurd and worthy of laughter.

The truth is that Sarah had had precious little to laugh about during the latter part of her life. She was childless. Therefore she was powerless to give her husband an heir that would come from her own body. Sarah probably didn’t laugh much. The bursts of jealousy between her and Hager and her son, Ishmael, might reflect that the situation was too much for her and was slowly causing her mental health issues. Sarah needs to laugh. Not a laugh of disbelief that she gave to the angel a year earlier, but a laugh that rocked her body and filled her soul with joy. And now, that was exactly what God had given to her – a son and the ability to really laugh.

So, when life greets you laugh. Laugh with the birth of your child. Laugh when a world leader throws candies at you. Laugh for no reason. After all, it is better than the alternative.

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 22