Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. – Acts 16:3

Today's Scripture Reading (January 31, 2021): Acts 16

We expect more of our leaders. And we should. Leaders set the example for the rest of us. But the problem is that that seems to be the minority opinion. Many of our leaders seem to believe that they are above the law rather than servants of it. They appear to think that they should possess the respect of being a leader without the responsibility of leadership. But responsibility always comes first, and true leaders will always adhere to the laws that govern our society to a deeper degree than the rest of us.

As Paul's second missionary journey begins, the "Council's Letter to the Gentile Believers" is five years in the rearview mirror. Among the Jews, the letter hasn't stopped the discussion, and there are many observant Jews who believe that James was wrong, that circumcision is necessary to be a true Christian.

But there is also no doubt that the victory, five years earlier, was Paul's. So, it is natural to wonder why Paul would circumcise Timothy when he had argued that circumcision was unnecessary for a Christian? Was the Apostle to the Gentiles beginning to doubt his argument? Maybe, to be a Christian, you do have to be circumcised.

Confusing the issue even further are Paul's words to Titus.

For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain (Titus 1:10-11).

What is going on?

The answer is in the ancestry of the two men. Titus was a Greek with no connection to the Jews; he was simply a Gentile believer. On the other hand, Timothy was born to a mixed couple, his mother was Jewish, and his father was Greek. Because his father was Greek, Timothy was uncircumcised. But because his mother was a Jew, and tribal and national identity in Judaism traditionally follows the maternal line, Timothy was a Jew. But because he was not circumcised, he could be best described as an apostate Jew. The problem was that Paul didn't want Christianity to be known as a collection of lazy or bad Jews. If they were to have a voice in the Jewish community, they needed to be above reproach with those who believed that circumcision was necessary for all good Jews.

The wording of the phrase makes it possible that Paul actually performed the circumcision of Timothy. He did it because he wanted Timothy to become a Jewish leader of the Christian Church. Paul wanted Timothy to be able to speak in the synagogues of the Jews living in Diaspora, which would be impossible for an apostate Jew. He wanted Timothy to be welcome in the Temple in Jerusalem. And because sometimes being a leader means that we have to do what is not even asked of one who merely follows.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 17

It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. – Acts 15:19

Today's Scripture Reading (January 30, 2021): Acts 15

Plato argued that we should "be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle." We have tempered his words in our social media world by saying that they might be fighting a harder battle. But Plato doesn't offer us that possibility; he says that everyone is fighting a harder battle. And they are because it is their battle. Their struggle might not even be hard for you to overcome, but you aren't the one going through the trial; they are. And therefore, they are fighting the more challenging battle.

As the elders contemplate changes to what is essential to be a Christian, there is no question that the real issue here is the dual Jewish laws of mandatory circumcision for males and specific dietary rules that applied to everyone. And for the Jews, this was easy. Circumcision was something that was done to children when they were eight days old. And the food laws were part of the natural order that, once learned, were easy to follow. For the Jews, and for those who believed that new converts to the Christian Faith had to become Jews, this was not hard.

But for the Gentiles, it was a very different story. Circumcision was not only hard for the Gentiles; it was offensive. Part of the problem was that athletes who participated in the games did so in the nude. While we might think that if you are going to perform naked, that modesty must not be an issue, the reality was that for the Gentiles, the question of modesty became an issue if the man was circumcised. A circumcised male could not compete in sporting contests, or be naked in the baths, and remain modest. It was impossible.

One of the complaints about the Christian Church is that it is really Paulianity because most of the New Testament doctrine was written by Paul. But Paul was not the leading figure of the church at this point. The apostles had led the church in the days immediately following the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, but not even they were in control here. The baton had been passed to James, the brother of Jesus, who seems to be heading the church in Jerusalem, which was the church's heart worldwide. On the testimony of Peter and now Paul, James had decided that the Jews should not make it difficult on the Gentiles who were turning to God. James's message was clear; let's decide on what is essential and hold to that. Let's find the things about which we can let go.

It is the eternal job of the church. In our missionary efforts, both overseas and in our neighborhoods, we need to understand what is essential and what can be held loosely. For the early church, circumcision and the dietary laws could be held loosely. These restrictions might be necessary to Judaism, but they were a barrier to the Gentile believers; and James, on behalf of a Jewish church, decided that these barriers to Christianity just didn't need to be there.  

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 16

Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker. – Acts 14:12

Today's Scripture Reading (January 29, 2021): Acts 14

In 8 C.E., Ovid wrote his epic tale "Metamorphoses" in fifteen volumes. In the eighth book, the poet tells the tale of Baucis and Philemon. The story is that Jove (or Zeus) and Hermes stepped down from the heavens to earth, but they came in disguise. Hermes was the messenger of all of the gods, but he had a special relationship with Zeus. The two gods left the comforts of home and their power, one laying aside his thunder (Zeus) and the other his rod (Hermes), and they walked together on the earth. On their journey, they knocked on a thousand doors, but all of them were locked. No one answered their hail. Until they came to the house of Baucis and Philemon. Ovid calls their house a "homely shed," where the roof was not far from the ground. But even in this setting, Baucis and Philemon, who had been married for a long time, live happily.

The door to Baucis and Philemon's home was opened, and the old couple invited the travelers in to rest their limbs. They shared their sparse furnishings and all that they had with Zeus and Hermes. There wasn't much, but what Baucis and Philemon had, they offered to their guests. Even to the last of their drink and food. The cup of wine made its trip around the table, and even though it had been emptied, it appeared to be full.

Baucis and Philemon realized that something extraordinary was happening, and they raised their hands in surrender, recognizing that their guests were not just weary human travelers. They apologize to the gods for their country fare, and Zeus and Hermes tell them that they are the only ones in the area who were willing to welcome them. As a result, the gods want to reward them. Baucis and Philemon only ask for two things. The first was that they would be allowed to serve in the Temple of Zeus. And their second request was that they die together, so neither had to gaze on the others' grave.

As for the thousand houses, they were destroyed.

It is a cautionary tale on the importance of hospitality, and one that was likely ringing in the ears of the people of Lystra as they encounter Paul and Barnabas. As Paul and Barnabas enter the city and meet the man that had been lame from birth, healing him, the town is sure that Zeus and Hermes had made a return visit to the area. And this time, they were not going to be like the thousand homes who had rejected the pair of gods the first time. Because Paul was the speaker, the messenger, they were sure that he must be Hermes in disguise. Zeus, the King of the gods, stood back and allowed his friend to carry the discussion with the people of the town. But the city made sure that the pair were fully welcomed.

The story of Zeus and Hermes's visit with Baucis and Philemon is reflected throughout the Bible. Angels came in human form and visited with Abraham and Sarah, and then later destroyed Sodom, Gomorrah, and the cities of the plain. Their sin had nothing to do with homosexuality. The testimony of the Bible is clear that Sodom's failure was a lack of hospitality.

And the tale is reflected in the words of the author of Hebrews. "Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters. Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it" (Hebrews 13:1-2). Go and be a people who show hospitality.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 15

After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the leaders of the synagogue sent word to them, saying, "Brothers, if you have a word of exhortation for the people, please speak." – Acts 13:15

Today's Scripture Reading (January 28, 2021): Acts 13

The bully pulpit. The term was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt, who used the term to describe his office. The bully pulpit combined the term "bully," an adjective by which Roosevelt meant "superb" or "wonderful," and "pulpit," the traditional place from which a pastor or priest speaks out the message of God to the people. In Roosevelt's mind, the President's office was a terrific platform for which the first or lead politician could advocate for the things that he believed were important. The bully pulpit has become a sacred place, treasured by Presidents and Prime Ministers of many nations over the past century. It is where they get to stand and advocate for the good things that can be achieved if the people will just get behind the ideas they are putting forward.

And the bully pulpit has become a jealously guarded place, reserved for the elected political leaders. So is the pastor's pulpit. In contemporary times, pastors and churches tend to carefully guard who it is that they allow to speak from the pulpit of the church. But that has not always been the tradition. In times past, the pulpit, or the Jewish bema, was a place that was offered to visiting pastors and teachers. I can't imagine that the experience was without trepidation or that it always worked out well. Sometimes, the visiting leaders spoke encouragement, but sometimes they advocated for things that went against the existing leadership's prominent teachings.

But this was precisely the standard practice in the first-century Jewish Synagogues. Especially in the Gentile world, leaders would take advantage of visiting dignitaries who might bring a word of teaching to the Jews and God-fearers who had gathered. Paul's upbringing and education made him a coveted speaker among the synagogues of the diaspora. He was brought up as a Hebrew, a descendant of the tribe of Benjamin. He was a Pharisee, a group that was esteemed by the people for their piety. He had also been educated at the school of Gamaliel, one of the most prominent rabbis of the era.

The synagogue leader invites Paul and Silas to come and speak; to bring encouragement to the congregation. The synagogue's bully pulpit or terrific platform was surrendered to Paul, and whatever it was on which he would like to speak.

For Paul, the subject was obvious. Once the platform had been surrendered, Paul would use the pulpit to advocate for Jesus and invite those listening to join him in his passion for following the Messiah who had come. And even though he had been crucified, the resurrected Christ still actively led the church into a glorious future.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 14

Don't grumble against one another, brothers and sisters, or you will be judged. The Judge is standing at the door! – James 5:9

Today's Scripture Reading (January 27, 2021): James 4 & 5

Socrates argued that "Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." I think the Greek philosopher would have been disappointed with the place to which our culture has devolved. It seems we rarely discuss at the level of ideas anymore. Our go-to always appears to be at the level of people. It is not that the argument is unsound because we have examined it, and the idea doesn't measure up. It is that the person is an idiot, or they belong to the wrong political party, and because the person is lacking, so is every idea that comes from their minds.  And that needs to change.

Not long ago, I publicly complimented a politician on handling one aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic. I am convinced that politicians, like children, need to be praised when they do something right. The compliment was given in a limited sense, but the local government had done something right and deserved recognition. The response I received from one friend was that the government had made a mess of education. They were losers, and because they were losers, they were incapable of doing anything right. The argument had quickly gone from a discussion over an idea and devolved into the realm of personality.  

In the conclusion of James's letter, he admonishes his readers not to grumble against each other, adding that they will be judged if they do complain. The concept is revolutionary. It argues that, while it is entirely appropriate to discuss at the level of ideas, it is not right to discuss at the level of people. And if we do allow our discussions to devolve to the level of a person, then we would be judged, regardless of how stupid the original idea might have been.

It is not that we are never to discuss the areas in which we differ. Discussions over ideas is a good thing. But it should be kept at that level. When we disagree, we need to make sure that personality doesn't enter into the discussion. Someone isn't wrong because of who they are or because of the political party to whom they might belong. A person is never wrong, never. It is the idea or the concept that is wrong.

Senator John McCain in a 2008 campaign stop reacted the way that James would have us all react when a supporter complained that "Obama was an Arab," McCain took the microphone and took over the conversation. No, he did not discuss that Arab's are good people or that there is nothing wrong with being an Arab. I think the criticism of McCain over this is misplaced. He was not the espousing a well thought out policy statement. It was a reaction to an attack that had occurred at the level of the person. McCain's response was simple. "No, ma'am, he's a decent family man, citizen, that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues." It was a proper response. Socrates would have been proud; and, so would James. Obama was a good man with, according to McCain's point of view, some bad ideas. So, let's spend our time talking about the ideas, and whether they are really good or bad. And it is at this level that our disagreements and discussions should exist.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 13

We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check. – James 3:2

Today's Scripture Reading (January 26, 2021): James 3

Vera Nazarian, in "The Perpetual Calendar of Inspiration," argued, "was it you or I who stumbled first? It does not matter. The one of us who finds the strength to get up first, must help the other." The question is never whether we stumble. We all do. We stumble, and then we get up again and move on. Nazarian's point is that when we, as a group of stumblers, get onto our feet, regardless of how momentary our balance might be with us, we are required to help those who have stumbled to regain their feet.

That is how it should work. But, in truth, it doesn't. At least, that is not the way that we perceive it. Too often, those who have momentarily gained their feet seem to be more likely to ignore or take advantage of those who have stumbled, rather than helping them to get up again. And our unfortunate response is that often when we know that we have stumbled, we want to isolate ourselves from those around us who have found the strength to stand again. When we have fallen, we fear, rightfully, those who are standing. It shouldn't be that way, but that is our reality.

James says that "we stumble in many ways." There is not just one way to fall. We fall because of our actions, and while that might be the most obvious way that we fail, it is not the only way we stumble. James is about to enter into an argument that what we say is as important, or maybe more important, than what we do. Just as a small rudder can steer a large ship, the tongue essentially guides the actions of our lives. What we say and the positions that we take on issues are critical, and when our words stumble, sometimes we tend to overlook these moments as just words. Yet, our speech and the things that we say our loud, or even just to ourselves, will often prove to be the very things that cause us to physically fall.

The perfect one is not just the one whose actions are without fault; the perfect can keep their whole body in check, including the things that they say. And that describes none of us. Because we all stumble, and we fall in many ways.

There was one who was perfect. His name was Jesus, and one we crucified. And yet, he came off the cross committed to helping us get up when we have stumbled. He is our restoration and our reconciliation to God. But more than that, he is our example. What he does is what we should do. And when someone falls, we should be the ones to help the other to stand up because we have found our strength.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: James 4 & 5          

My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism. – James 2:1

Today's Scripture Reading (January 25, 2021): James 2

In "Living, Loving, and Learning," Leo Buscaglia says, "Don't walk in my head with your dirty feet." I understand the prohibition. I live in a world of division and partitions.  It is a world that is filled with prejudices. And what is even worse is that the world seems to want to convince me that their biases are and God-approved. They want to walk around my head with their dirty feet. And when you walk around with dirty feet, you always leave footprints.

James lived in an era of prejudice, and often they were prejudices that many believed were God-approved. It was an era where prejudice was common and based on ethnicity, nationality, economic class, and religious background. People were judged as being either a Jew or Gentile, the free were separated from the slave, the rich removed themselves from the presence of the poor, and the educated Greek culture looked down on the uncivilized and primitive Barbarian. For many, these were the accusations the people used against each other to prove that they were better and more worthy of consideration than their opponents.

Jesus stepped into this era and taught something different. He frequently ignored the barriers, calling the tax-collector and the prostitute to follow him and showing his love and concern for people that the culture had discarded. But in the days of Jesus, there are indications that James, the little brother of the Rabbi, thought that his big brother was mistaken. In those days, he held the teachings of Jesus with contempt. It wasn't until after Jesus's resurrection that James began to realize that his brother was the Messiah, and he began his journey to accept the teachings of Jesus.

By the time that he writes his letter, he agrees. The old prejudices that Jesus rejected now needed to be rejected by the church and its leadership. Believers could not follow the favoritisms of the past. It was time for a change. Later, Paul would expand on James's teaching that "believers in … Jesus Christ must not show favoritism." He would write to the Galatian church, "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Galatians 3:28-29). And then, Paul would expand again on this teaching in his letter to the church at Ephesus

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility (Ephesians 2:14-16).

In light of all of this, maybe it is time that we demand that those around us "stop walking around our heads with their dirty feet."

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: James 3

Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds … - James 1:2

 Today's Scripture Reading (January 24, 2021): James 1

In 2010, as NBA Basketball was experimenting with developing "Dream Teams "of elite players, shifting the NBA into a battle between a few super or all-star teams. The rest of the schedule would be filled out with lesser teams who had no chance of winning the Larry O'Brien Trophy, the trophy given out yearly to the NBA Champions. Basketball legend Michael Jordan, as these teams were beginning to form, spoke up for a generation of fans who couldn't get their head around what was happening. "I would have never called up Larry [Bird], called up Magic [Johnson], and said 'hey, let's get together and play on one team.' But things are different - I can't say that's a bad thing. That's an opportunity these kids have today. In all honesty, I was trying to beat those guys."

Jordan's comment strikes a chord with old school sports fans. In my early adulthood, I was a fan of the Calgary Flames hockey team. The Flames' provincial rival was the Edmonton Oilers, in those early days captained by the Great One, Wayne Gretzky. But, among Flame's fans, there was not a wish that Wayne Gretzky played for our club. We wanted to beat Gretzky and took a perverse joy in the moments when that wish was fulfilled. We understand Michael Jordan when he says that he didn't want to join hands with Larry Bird on the same team. Jordan's desire, and his joy, was held in the moments when he had a chance to prove his worth by playing against him. I suspect that Larry Bird and Magic Johnson would feel the same way about playing with each other or Michael Jordan. These elites could be friends outside of the playing arena, but they wanted to test their strengths against the strengths of the best around them on the court.

Sometimes we consider James's words almost counter-cultural. I mean, we want a comfortable life. Trials are moments that we want to avoid, at all costs. Problems are a common part of life, but not moments that fill us with joy.

Yet, it is in these moments of trials that we prove, if only to ourselves, that we are up to the challenge of facing the stresses of which life is full. It is in these moments that we get to proudly exclaim that we have this. Yes, life is hard. But we are ready for whatever it is that life has to throw at us. And through every trial, we only get stronger.

Spiritually, we also recognize that Satan is limited in the weapons he has at his disposal. And if he is wasting his weapons on the trials that he is throwing at us, we must be making a difference. Paul simply says that testing produces perseverance, and perseverance results in maturity and completeness.

So, go and make a difference, knowing that any resulting testing will only make us stronger and confident that life can't throw anything at us that we can't handle.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: James 2

Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died. – Acts 12:23

Today's Scripture Reading (January 23, 2021): Acts 12

Italian journalist, Italo Calvino, said in "The Uses of Literature" that "A classic is a book that has never finished saying what it has to say." Meaning is often subjective and dependent on the emotions and circumstances of the reader. A classic book continues to elicit a response from the reader, regardless of the era in which the book is read. I recently read Upton Sinclair's "Dragon Teeth." The 1942 Novel won the Pulitzer Prize for the novel in 1943. It covers the events of the Nazi takeover of Germany, covering the years 1929-1934. Sinclair had no idea as he wrote the novel how the war was going to end. In 1942, things weren't going well for those who opposed Nazi Germany. But he had his own idea about how the world got to 1942, and in his novel, you can see the seeds that Sinclair believed were sown in the period covered by the story. "Dragon's Teeth" is about Adolf Hitler, Hermann Göring, Joseph Goebbels, and others of the Nazi war machine. It is a story of what has already happened, tied very distinctly into the early Nazi era. But the novel is also about the shifting purposes of Hitler led Nazi Germany, from wanting the best for Germany to a quest for worldwide domination. It is a novel mired in history.

And yet, as I read the novel in the opening days of 2021, I see some contemporary politicians and politics described in the story's telling. If Sinclair had been writing in 2020, maybe we would blame him for making some unfair comparisons with his words even if he doesn't mention any names. But Sinclair died in 1968. My mind is making the connections, teaching me a lesson anew, one that I would have never learned if I had read the novel five or ten years ago.

Herod Agrippa died. The year was 44 C.E., and Passover had just ended. Agrippa headed from Jerusalem to Caesarea, where he had planned games to be performed to honor the Roman Emperor, Claudius. The scene of Agrippa's arrival at Caesarea is described by the ancient Jewish historian Josephus.

"He put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theatre early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment, being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another (though not for his good), that he was a god. (Josephus, Antiquities).

And then, Herod Agrippa died. Cause of death? Historically the answer to that question remains unknown. The cause of Agrippa's death seems to depend on the meaning the reader attributes to the death. Luke says that he was eaten by worms and died. As beautiful as Agrippa may have looked on the outside, it was the growing evil on the inside that would bring him down. It is a description of the death of the leader because of a spiritual cause.

Josephus probably gives us the most objective cause of death. According to Josephus, "A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner… when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life" (Josephus, Antiquities). But it is easy to connect Luke's interpretation with the cause of death given by Josephus.

The meaning to the death of Agrippa, from Agrippa himself, was that he died as a result of an omen. Tiberius had earlier imprisoned Agrippa, and at that time, he saw an owl perched over his head. The prophecy was said to have meant that he would be swiftly released and reign as King. But if he ever saw the omen again, he would die. On that day in Caesarea, as the crowd proclaimed him to be a god, Agrippa saw an owl perched over his head, and at that moment, he knew that he would die (Josephus, Antiquities).

Maybe the most practical of possible causes of death is provided by the Jews. Herod's death was the result of a political assassination. Rome had simply had enough of the want-to-be King and decided that he must be removed. The five days of stomach pain were likely the result of the poisoning of Herod (Brann, Agrippa I).

Which is the truth? The cause and the meaning of Agrippa's death are now in your hands. You are the reader who now draws conclusions about the death of an ancient want-to-be king.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: James 1

Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews. – Acts 11:19

Today's Scripture Reading (January 22, 2021): Acts 11

Part of the Christian Church's shame is that we have often gone into other cultures with the demand that to become a Christian, the people had to become like us. In Africa, we mixed up the spiritual with the cultural and often demanded that the Africans become culturally white to become Christian. In North America, our shame was shown in the church's attempts over the years to drive the "Indian" out of Native Americans. I have to admit that one of my most cherished experiences was to attend a Christian Smudging. It was a moment when I was able to take part in a religious experience which merged the Christian belief in the presence of the Holy Spirit with a First Nations experience of inviting the smoke of the sweetgrass to sweep over our bodies, cleansing us from all that we need to be cleansed.

Some Christians struggle with the possibility that someone might be spiritually Christian, but culturally Native American, or Muslim, or even Buddhist or Hindu. We can easily be confused about what it means to follow Christ and what it is that our faith demands of us.

Even after Peter's experience with the Cornelius, the Christian missionary efforts' primary audience were the Jews in Diaspora. It was the Jews who heard the message. The church's expansion into the Gentile populations would wait for the ministry of Paul and his friends. But, for now, it was only the Jews that received the teaching.

The effect of this Christian teaching being directed only to the Jews was that Christianity originally was nothing more than just another Jewish sect. For many of the early believers, being a good Jew was essential to being a good Christian. If you were not born a Jew, then to become a Christian, the first step was to become a Jew. Becoming a Jew meant being baptized into the faith, which meant, among other things, being circumcised and accepting the Jewish food laws. (Imagine, to be a Christian meant living in a world without bacon.) To be a Christian didn't mean becoming like a western white man; it originally meant becoming a Jew.

It was an error from which, through Paul's ministry and the testimony of Peter, the Christian Church would eventually recover. But maybe the saddest part of the story would be that we would lose sight of the early church's mistake and repeat it in the modern era. You don't have to look like me to be Christian. But, according to Jesus, you do have to love God and love your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22:34-40). Do this, and believe and serve our Messiah's cause, and you are Christian, regardless of your cultural practices.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 12

 

He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly. – Acts 10:2

Today's Scripture Reading (January 21, 2021): Acts 10

There is a new political animal that appears to be roaming around the landscape of the United States. Joining the Democratic Donkey and the Republican Elephant, the Rhino (or RINO) has joined the American zoo. Actually, the RINO has been around since the early twentieth century. It gained popularity in the 1990s, but in the fracturing of the Republican party during the Donald Trump era, it has become much more popular. Of course, the RINO is always the other person. The Nickname stands for "Republican in Name Only."

The fracturing of conservative movements is something that seems to be happening all over the world. I live in maybe one of the few places where there seems to be a competition over who can get further right. In the past several elections, there have been many politically right parties competing for control of the local government. And on at least one occasion, the composition on the right gifted power to the left.

Amid the fracture, there is a competition about what it really means to be a conservative. I have to admit that, as a political conservative, for me, the definition involves limited government and fiscal responsibility. If you read this blog often, you probably know that I do not believe that massive debt is a good idea, let alone the uncontrolled debt that seems to define most of our modern nations. I am not an American, but because I have rejected many of Donald Trump's directives over the past few years, I would probably be considered a RINO. I am a conservative. I would describe myself as part of the Moderate Right. Still, because of my opposition to some of conservatism's features of the Trump era, many people would consider me an imposter, even in my country and the home of the Donald Trump impersonators.

Christianity has had a similar struggle. What does it mean to be Christian? What beliefs are essential to Christianity? And there are probably as many answers to the question as there are people willing to ask it. For me, Christianity is more about our willingness to love our neighbor and to love across our cultural dividing lines than it is about a Shibboleth confession to what some might argue is an orthodox belief. As a result, even I am considered to be, at least by some people, a Christian In Name Only.

The culture into which the Christians Church was born featured several divisions in the Jewish faith. There was a division between the Jews who followed the Jewish religion and Jewish culture and those who only followed the spiritual directives. Even within this group of orthodox Jews, there were divisions and fights about what it meant to truly be a Jew. The Pharisees and Sadducees both laid claim to the right to be the real Jewish faith community. The Essenes had opposed both of these groups. They had separated from the contemporary Jewish culture because they believed that being a faithful Jew was impossible in the day's corrupt culture. I think that John the Baptist was a member of this sect of the Jewish faith. But there were others.

Outside of Judea, there were Jews who held to Judaism's spiritual beliefs but had mixed into their faith Greek cultural practices. These were the Hellenist Jews, and according to the Jews in Judea, they were Jewish in Name Only.

And then there were the God-fearers. These were Gentiles who had developed a sincere affection for the Jewish people and their God. They read the scripture, prayed to the God of the Jews, donated money to Jewish causes, but they stopped short of becoming Jews; they were uncircumcised and did not keep the Jewish food laws. As a result, they didn't even rise to the level of being Jewish in Name Only. The Jewish people appreciated these God-fearers. But because they were uncircumcised, a real Jew could not go into their homes or associate in any way with them. They were loved, but only at a distance.

Cornelius was a God-fearer. Peter was a Jew from Judea. But not one who was just a Jew, but a Jew endeavoring to live as a real Jew would; Peter did not aspire to be a Jew in Name Only. And this is the beginning of the shocking story of their unique relationship.  

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 11

Peter stayed in Joppa for some time with a tanner named Simon. – Acts 9:43

 Today's Scripture Reading (January 20, 2021): Acts 9

There are many ways that we divide, even if that is not what we intend to do. There are people in our lives with whom we don't associate. We divide along economic, cultural, racial, and religious lines. And these are lines that we don't cross. Sometimes it is just that we never think to cross the line. Sometimes it is because we don't believe we have the opportunity to cross the line. Or maybe we don't know how to cross the line. But usually, if we are honest, we are afraid of how others might react to our crossing the line. And so we remain where it is safe, on our side of the line.

Some years ago, a friend admitted that they were upset when a Muslim family moved in next door. She wanted someone to befriend, someone with whom she could be a neighbor, but instead, she received someone that she did not understand. Finally, she admitted that she had a conversation with God, and God told her that she was afraid of death; in this case, death was represented by a neighbor who lived on the other side of the line. It was a nice try, but not the real story. The truth was that there was a line that she didn't know how to cross, and she was scared at what it might mean if she did try to cross that line.

Luke casually informs us that "Peter stayed in Joppa for some time with a tanner named Simon." He says it so nonchalantly that the reader is tempted to skip over the words to what happens next. But instead, we should be invited to camp out here in this one verse and with this one thought. For some time, Peter made his home with Simon the Tanner. The story of Cornelius, which comes next in Luke's history, is crucial because it shows a growth in Peter to the point that he was willing to cross a line, welcoming a Gentile and his household into the emerging Christian Church. We miss that the process had already started because Peter had made his home with Simon the Tanner. A line had already been crossed.

The significance of Peter's stay with Simon, the Tanner, has nothing to do with Simon's nationality and everything to do with the fact that he was a tanner. According to Jewish law, anyone who came in contact with the dead body of an animal was deemed to be ritually unclean. Because a tanner dealt with dead animals regularly, the law instructed that a tanner had to build his home at least twenty-five meters (or seventy-five feet) outside of any town or village. G. Campbell Morgan writes that "The trade of a tanner was held in such supreme contempt that if a girl was betrothed to a tanner without knowing that he followed that calling, the betrothal was void."

And yet, Luke casually tells us that "Peter stayed in Joppa for some time with a tanner named Simon." Peter had crossed a line that must have caused him significant discomfort. But God was already showing him that things were different and that lines were created to be crossed.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 10

And Saul approved of their killing him. On that day a great persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. – Acts 8:1

Today's Scripture Reading (January 19, 2021): Acts 8

In “Julian,” Gore Vidal wrote that “On the throne of the world, any delusion can become fact.” The novel is a fictionalized account of Julian the Apostate, building on Julian’s rejection of Christianity, then the dominating religion in the Roman Empire, and his acceptance of other faiths. The book is remembered for its scathing review of the Christian Church.

But the delusion that becomes fact is not just a truth concerning religion. It is a practice that has been repeated throughout history. It is as if people believe that if they can recite any idea often enough, that idea can be made into reality. And, often, they are right. Truth can sometimes be nothing more than a lie that is often repeated, whether we are talking about politicians, teachers, or even just the little lies that we keep telling ourselves to justify our own actions. People sometimes wonder why people in power keep telling a lie long after the fact-checkers have proven that the story is incorrect. And the answer is that they keep telling the lie because they know this reality. Fact-checkers have some influence, but not enough. Keep telling the lie, and eventually, people might accept the falsehood as truth.

Luke reports that “Saul approved” of the murder of Stephen. But the language is weaker than the story deserves. Saul was enthusiastic in his support of the execution of Stephen. He was like a cheerleader on the sideline of the big game. Saul actively encouraged everything that was going on. In the end, he actively kept the lie alive; about Stephen and the Christian Church. Anything that was possibly negative, Saul would advertise. Through the false stories that he would tell, he kept the story going, and the emotions of the Jews were kept high against the Christians. Not only was Saul enthusiastic, but his cheering also made the people enthusiastic as well.

As a result, a great persecution broke out against the Christian Church. The persecution of the Christians in Judea was so great that the Christians in the area were forced to pack up their lives and leave, scattering them all over the known world just to keep themselves safe. The lies that Saul had been enthusiastically telling were now the facts of the land, and because the delusion had become the truth, it was dangerous to be a Christian in Judea.

But the Christians' scattering in this great persecution began a process that later Saul, now known as Paul, would take advantage of in later days. The dispersion of Christians also dispersed the belief in “Jesus the Resurrected” throughout the known world. And that belief would one day be fanned into a flame of truth through the enthusiastic teachings of “Paul the Apostle,” a man once known as “Saul the Persecutor.”

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 9

Because the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, they sold him as a slave into Egypt. But God was with him … - Acts 7:9

Today's Scripture Reading (January 18, 2021): Acts 7

I have never been fond of true stories. On a significant anniversary, many years ago, my wife convinced me to watch the 2006 movie "The Pursuit of Happyness" with Will Smith. As an actor, I like Will Smith, but I would much rather watch "Men in Black" or maybe even "Bright" than "The Pursuit of Happyness." And after watching the struggle portrayed in the movie, I was depressed for days. I mean, it was based on a true story. People to whom I have related this story usually remind me that the story has a happy ending. And yes, I did watch it to the end, but it doesn't help. All I could think of was that the real Chris Gardner didn't know that his story would have a happy ending in the middle of the struggle. In real life, happy endings are not assured.

Another friend told me that her favorite movie, one that she could not get enough of, was the 2007 movie "Into the Wild." I had never heard of the movie, but she lent me her copy of the film and made me promise to watch it. Spoiler Alert: "Into the Wild" is another true story, and this one comes equipped with a depressing ending; the hero dies. And once more, the movie left me depressed. I can feel a sad mood coming on just thinking about the story.

So, leave me with Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, and any other unrealistic stories that Hollywood might want to tell. I will leave the true stories to my friends who enjoy them, and maybe that includes you.

However, there is a problem with my plan. It doesn't matter what the movie is or the novel that I might be reading. Every story is based, at least a little, in reality. (If you are wondering, currently, that novel is the 1943 Pulitzer Prize winning novel "Dragon's Teeth" written by Upton Sinclair. Dragon's Teeth is a fictionalized account of a wealthy family living in Europe in the days leading up to World War II; maybe I am just a glutton for punishment.) I have friends who say they can't read science fiction or fantasy because they cannot suspend their belief system. But the reality is that a good science fiction story grounds itself in the world that we know, just like a good Bruce Willis action thriller takes place in the world that we know.

And sometimes, the story that we tell is really about something else. Stephen is telling a story. It is a historical story and one that Stephen's audience knows well. But there are also stresses in his report that are pointing in a different direction. The retelling of Joseph and his brothers' story is important because it mirrors the story of Jesus, who the leaders confronting Stephen are rejecting. Both Joseph and Jesus were rejected by those who should have supported them. Both were thought to have died; a brother spared Joseph and Jesus rose again from the dead. And both became the Savior that the people needed.

Stephen also stresses that God was with Joseph. Jesus. of course, is Emmanuel, which means "God with us." In telling the story of Joseph, Stephen seemed to be retelling the story of Jesus, trying desperately to get his message across to his audience that his accusers were playing the roles of Joseph's brothers. One day, in a moment of great stress, they were going to come face to face with Jesus, and in need to receive deliverance that only Jesus will be able to grant, just as Joseph's brothers came face to face with Joseph in need of his help. It is a true story hidden with another true story, and there is no doubt that Stephen's accusers understood both of the stories that Stephen is telling.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Acts 8