Torn Between Two Worlds: Jer 8:18-9:26

Jeremiah 8:18-9:26

Have you ever thought to yourself or been told that if you are exactly in the middle of God’s will for your life, things will be easy or smooth? I think sometimes we carry that assumption around, even if we do so without thinking about it. Without doubt, there are times of blessing, plenty, grace and peace, but if we take a close look at the lives of faithful people in Scripture, such as Jeremiah, we realize that God’s plan for our lives often contains times of struggle and difficulty.

The point I want to draw from this passage comes from the passage 8:18 through 9:3. We should take note that Jeremiah is not struggling in his walk with God, or “kicking at the goads” with his calling. Rather, Jeremiah is leading a faithful life dedicated to God and His work through him. And yet it brings him an unusual amount of personal frustration.

“My joy is gone; grief is upon me; my heart is sick within me.”

The prophet then laments about God being gone from His people, and surprisingly enough, God answers his question. Jeremiah wonders if God is still in Zion, and God says there is a good reason it feels like He is absent-the people have turned away from Him. All too often when we pass through seasons in which it seems God is absent, we blame God for being gone. What we should be doing is asking whether we have turned away from Him in any significant way.

And then as Jeremiah continues to struggle through his people’s rebellion and God’s judgment, the first three verses of chapter 9 give us a great glimpse into the heart and mind of the weeping prophet. Contrast the first line of verse one with the first line of verse two:

“Oh that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night…”

“Oh that I had in the desert a traveler’s lodging place, that I might leave my people.”

Jeremiah is in a place of struggle and difficulty because he is bound to his people and bound to God at the same time; he will not let go of his love and care for his culture and he will not let go of his call and vocation from God.

Pretend you have never read beyond Jeremiah 9:3; think for a moment as if you don’t know what the rest of the book holds. Will God’s prophet stay, be faithful to God’s call and hope against hope that some will listen and be saved, or will he disappear into the desert and cast his prophecies over the wall of the city from a safe distance?

Which will we choose? Do we find ourselves torn between love for our fellow human being across the street and our call to be witnesses for God? Have we given up on one or the other in the stress and strain of the conflict? The easy choice is to let one of them go-either love for our neighbor, or our dedication to God. But that is not the choice Jeremiah made.

True Repentance: Taking Shame Seriously

Jeremiah 8:4-17

In our study of Jeremiah we find ourselves in chapter 8, and in another long litany of judgments and proclamations by God. It is easy in such a book to loose sight of the details and nuances of these kinds of passages and skim over them as if they were all the same. What a closer reading finds, however, is a wealth of knowledge about human nature and the character and nature of God.

In the first three verses of our passage we learn a little more about the realities of true repentance (for a fuller passage see Jeremiah 3:6-4:4). It is just a matter of human nature, for instance, to turn away from God in our sin, recognize our mistake, and make an effort at returning to God: “When men fall, do they not rise again?” But Judah has made a habit of turning away from God, and it has become a “perpetual” activity for them. Additionally, they no longer are bothered with the notion that they have done something wrong: “no man relents of his evil saying, ‘What have I done?’” At least two things can be gleaned here about true repentance.

First, we must not only turn away from sin and rebellion, but we must turn to God and fill ourselves with the things of God. It is not enough to rid ourselves of our sins; we must actively strive to be filled with the Spirit and mind of God. Secondly, an appropriate sense of shame and regret must accompany our contrition. Later in this passage, Jeremiah notes that the people commit shameful acts and have forgotten how to blush (vs. 12).

Shame, in spite of its poor public image, is a necessary component of the human conscience. It is like a pain reflex for inappropriate behavior. Shame tells us there may be something wrong with an act, and that we should pay closer attention to the morality of our behavior. Having said that, there are two ways of getting rid of shame. First, we can rectify our behavior. Second, we can normalize shameful behavior and short-circuit the shame reflex.

We live in a shameless society-you be the judge as to which route we have taken to get there.

Have we become accustomed to things that should cause us to reflect on our sinful nature and our separation from God? Are we loosing the ability to take sin and the radical rift it causes seriously? One of the first steps in returning to God is realizing our profound need to turn away from the things which so easily entangle us.

I Touched Him!

1 John 1:1-4

If I were to ask you to describe an influential person you knew several years ago, or to describe a close friend you have not seen in years, where would you begin? Most of us might begin with a description of the time and setting of our friendship or encounter and some of the more salient descriptive details. We might describe where we were, what they did for a living, people’s perception of that person, their career, their family, etc.

If we were really close to them, or they made a profound impact on us personally, we might begin with our experience of the person.

In his first epistle, John does a little of both. Maybe 40-50 years after Jesus’ death there has been plenty of time for the apostles and the Church to build theology around Him and who He was. There have been decades of teaching about Christ and encountering heresies that threatened to split congregants away from the true faith. And in 1 John, the author draws on much of that in order to correct some of the problems he sees in the congregation to which he writes.

One of the burdens of 1 John is to answer questions like, “Who is Jesus?” and “How do we identify Christianity among all the competitors?” So John fills his readers ears and heads with plenty of foundational theology. Just in these first few verses we encounter the crucial realities of Jesus as eternally existent God (“from the beginning”) and fully incarnate man (“made manifest”). John points out that we, as Christians, cannot give one inch of our Christology-Jesus was fully God and fully man; He was God in the flesh reconciling the world to Himself.

But the thrust of John’s description in this opening section is his personal experience of the person Jesus Christ. Note the almost redundant usage of sensory language-heard, seen, looked, touched, seen, seen, heard. Jesus was a real person in real time touching the lives of real people.

John’s first recollection of Jesus-the first method of communication John uses-is to say, “I touched him!”

Our discipleship should be filled with experience. We should be able to draw close to Christ, knowing who He is and paying close attention to the details of our doctrine, but at the same time touching, seeing, and feeling Him.

If you were to describe to someone who Jesus is, would you be able to begin where John began?

The Process of Repentance and Discipleship: Jeremiah 3:19-3:25

We all know the story of Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker-how Vader is redeemed through a final act of goodness that saves his son’s life and his own in the process. As the story describes it, Darth Vader was “turned” from the dark side of the force. A less familiar story (much less familiar) of “turning” is the moral drama that is Mr. Furious. After leaving his band of Mystery Men in a huff over his diminishing leadership role, he is convinced by his girlfriend to return and apologize. Mr. Furious sees a perfect opportunity to blame his behavior on his super power-his boundless rage. His girlfriend, though, simply suggests that he “just apologize.” Fortunately for Mr. Furious’ relationship with his good friend The Shoveler, not to mention the future of Champion City, he takes her advice over his own.

It takes a lot to admit when you are wrong. It takes even more character to return to the ones you have offended and apologize and reconcile-to repent. Our innate tendency is to blame the mistake or the sin on another or on circumstances out of our control (our “boundless rage”), but those tactics never produce a mutual and blessed relationship. Sometimes, the only thing that will work is an admission of guilt, a change of behavior, and a different perspective on our relationships. Sometimes, only genuine repentance will do.

In Jeremiah 3:19-4:4, we watch a conversation about repentance. Earlier in chapter 3 God called His people to return to Him and He promised blessing and forgiveness. Now the people express repentance. The tension lies in wondering if it is a genuine expression of sorrow for sin and a turning to the face of God, or if it is simply an expression of people singed by their own sinfulness.

Whatever it is, what God’s people express in their repentance makes for a profound understanding of sin. They clearly recognize that the years they spent on the hilltops worshiping false gods has been an utter waste (vs 23). And then they note that their rebellion has not only hurt their lives, but it has poisoned or destroyed the lives of others (parents and children.) A friend of mine is fond of saying that we don’t live for ourselves, and she is absolutely right. Our rebellion against God not only hurts us, but it separates us from God and from the ones who love us the most.

With all this deep comprehension of repentance and sin, let us hope it takes!

The reference to the “bare heights” is an interesting one. The hilltops are now devoid of the polls and temples of worship, so we know that Josiah’s reform is underway. And the people are weeping, lamenting their rebellion, which is a good thing. But they are still on the hilltop, where they used to gather routinely for the worship of pagan gods.

The process of maturity and discipleship is not always a straight line. The people of Israel were right to lament their sins, but they were not yet out of the habit of going to the temple to commit those sins. They were, if you will, in process. Our journeys are not dissimilar. Paul encourages us to transform the way the think about life, and we should discover that that is exactly what is at work as we learn to be more and more the disciple of Christ. We should be discovering “bare heights” in our lives over and over as we draw closer and closer to God.

Being A Pentecostal Church II

In the summer of 1906 there stood a reclaimed and whitewashed two-story factory building on the wrong side of the tracks in Los Angeles. If you were to walk inside at almost any time of the day or night you would behold some pretty amazing sights. A few fans hung from the ceiling, some wooden planks had been turned into pews, and there were a couple of old crates in the middle of the room turned on their sides and used as pulpits. There was a constant stream of people in and out of the building. They were praying, singing, and worshiping God in all kinds of languages. You would certainly notice something almost unheard of in its time-there was no visible segregation in any way. The rich and the poor, the children of slaves and the Oriental railroad workers were all in the same pews, apparently not aware that they shouldn’t be. One reporter who covered the Azuza Street revival remarked, “The ‘color line’ was washed away in the blood.”

Another notable detail that might have caught your eye was the man who appeared to be the leader. He was on the platform with a shoebox-on his head. From time to time he would remove the box, approach the makeshift pulpit, preach what God had planted on his heart, and then return to his seat and replace the shoebox-on his head. William J. Seymour, himself the son of a slave, was at the heart of the revival that shook the world of his day.

As a century has passed and pastors and theologians have looked back at Azuza Street, there have been many reactions. Most of them have focused on the shoebox-maybe not just the shoebox, but all the things that came with the revival that were shoebox-like. Many have mocked and rejected the Pentecostal movement because of its roots in Azuza Street, and others have tried their best to carry on the spirit of the revival. Unfortunately, what many people in this second category have carried on is the shoebox.

It is almost axiomatic in pastoral circles that if you have something that is working for you, you need to bottle it, write a book, and take your show on the road. What William J. Seymour did was write. And what he wrote about might surprise a lot of people who look back at all the shoeboxes of Pentecost-he wrote about love. What Seymour sought in Pentecost was not the signs or the wonders, and he certainly did not seek notoriety or fame for himself. What he sought out, and what he wanted others to see, was the life-transforming love of Jesus Christ.

Despite the scoffers, those who reject Pentecost, and those who try to turn a buck at its expense, Seymour watched the active presence of the Holy Spirit begin to transform the world around him by the power of God’s love.

In the events of Acts chapter 2, we have a clear and concise example of what the moment of Pentecost did to the church. On that very first day of the life of the church, what did it mean for them to be Pentecostal? In what follows, we will look at three sweeping themes of the chapter.

First: Pentecost empowered the church to glorify God in a way people could understand.

The obvious miracle of Pentecost was the act of speaking in tongues. But what it accomplished was the drawing of a crowd who then heard God glorified in their own native languages. Their curiosity was piqued; some wanted to know more about what was going on, and others were unable to grasp enough of what was happening, so they mocked the disciples.

How well is the world able to understand or translate the church? Do they know why we are here and why we do the things we do? A book I read recently made the point that there are dozens of churches in our culture who have a regional, national, or international reputation, but the people who live across the street have no idea what that church is all about.

Second: Pentecost empowers the church with the wisdom and strength it needs to fulfill Christ’s mission here on earth.

You might say that just moments before Acts 1:4, Peter still didn’t ‘get it.’ He and the other disciples still did not understand why Christ came. They still thought the Kingdom of God was a matter of human political and military institutions. But the moment the Holy Spirit came upon them, they understood to a much greater degree what the Kingdom was all about.

And in the face of even a little persecution, the disciples stood their ground and proclaimed Christ. Don’t forget that these are the same disciples who, just a few weeks earlier (even after beholding the empty tomb-John 20), were locked in a room with the windows shut.

Third: Pentecost empowers the Church to change the world through the lives of transformed believers.

The final section of Acts 2 describes a radically changed group of people. And the transformation was not trite. It was not just that mean people were now nice, and gruff people were now spunky. These people now saw everything differently. The rich no longer viewed their position as one of privilege, the poor no longer saw theirs as one of loss; they saw the way they ate differently; they viewed money differently; everything had been transformed.

Besides these transformed lives, the early church had nothing-no money, no buildings, no prominent political figures-nothing. But in the lives of the believers they did have the one thing every church desperately needs, and is so longing to have-the empowering and transforming presence of the Holy Spirit.

Being a Pentecostal Church I

As we make our way to Pentecost weekend, I think it will be appropriate to talk about what it means to be a Pentecostal church. I receive e-mails from time to time regarding Quail Lake and our style of worship and/or our denominational affiliation. We are affiliated with the Assembly of God, a Pentecostal denomination, and our theology and practice is in step with sound Pentecostal thinking.

What most people think of when confronted with Pentecostalism are the extraordinary things, and unfortunately, sometimes the abuses of a few charismatic churches and figures. While gifts such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, and words of wisdom are certainly crucial components to our theology and practice, I think there is a better place to begin when thinking about Pentecost and the birth of the church.

Paul famously deals with these issues in 1 Corinthians 12-14. I think we should begin where Paul does in 1 Corinthians 12:1-11. Instead of commencing by answering the issues of should we speak in tongues and how often, Paul begins by combating ignorance. The Corinthians were destructive in their use of the gifts because they were not clear as to why they were given-answering the question why is always primary to the question how.

The thrust of verses 2-3, rather cryptic themselves, is to point out that while the Corinthians used to worship mute idols, they now need to learn how to worship a God who is actually speaking to them and through them. No small matter indeed. (A fascinating cross-reference to this issue is Habakkuk-especially the opening questions compared to God’s words in the last third of chapter 2.)

Verses 4-6 arrange a Trinitarian example for the body of Christ; there may be many gifts that are given in many ways, but they are all given by the same God. The same point is made in verses 8-11. The simple thought in verse 7 is the fulcrum of this passage.

“To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.”

From the reality of the Trinity to the potentiality of the body, Paul urges us to understand that the Spirit is given to the church to create unity amidst our diversity. The phrase above, “common good” in the Greek is part of the work family from which we get our word “symphony.” The body is like a well written and executed symphony in which the Spirit is manifest diversely in each member while the good of the whole is served by the actions of each individual. You should take a minute or two to read through 1 Corinthians 14 and note how often Paul urges everything to be done for the edification of the body-it happens over and over.

If God has given you a spectacular gift-maybe you really are some kind of a prophet-then you should exercise that gift in keeping with Christ-like humility and in deference to your brothers and sisters in Christ. If God has given you a gift that causes you to find yourself in the shadows more often than not, realize that God is using you to build up the body to look more and more like His Son.

This is where we begin when we think about being a Pentecostal church.

Jude 5-7

Jude 5-7

Reading and understanding the Epistle of Jude is a little like arriving early to the symphony. As you find your seat and wait for the concert to begin, the musicians file in one by one, take their seats, and some of them begin to play their instrument. As each one runs over a section of their piece, the sound that reaches your ears is cacophonous, but if you broke down each individual piece and put it in its proper context it would make perfect sense. After a few minutes of warm-up, the conductor arrives on stage, raises his wand, and when he brings it back down the cacophony has turned into a symphony.

The middle section of Jude, verses 5-16 can be very cacophonous if we are not careful to put each piece of the text into its proper context. The key to understanding and applying Jude is not to skip over this quirky and odd section, but to pay careful and thoughtful attention to each piece. Fundamentally we want to know what Jude expected his hearers to understand, and how that applies to the twin thrusts of Jude-Mercy and Defending the Gospel.

In the current section, verses 5-7, Jude lists three examples of past judgment and wants his readers to understand how they relate to the false teachers. The first judgment story is familiar.

Jude reminds his readers of what happened in the desert after the exodus from Egypt? What happened? Those whom God showed great mercy upon rebelled, turned against God, and died in the desert. The Exodus is a pivotal point in Scripture, not only historically but theologically as well. Jude reminds his readers that God’s mercy and grace cannot be presumed upon.

The second example is about angels being held for final judgment. According to Jewish tradition (the way his readers would be thinking), these are the angels of Genesis 5 who sexually intermingled with humans. Their sexual perversion and deep disregard for God’s creation put them in chains awaiting eternal punishment.

The third example is again a familiar one-Sodom and Gomorrah were punished for their sexual impurity as well.

So to pause for a second and bring some symphony from the cacophony, why did Jude use these examples? The false teachers had come into the community of Christ and were teaching a kind of moral liberation. According to Jude they were perverting the grace of God, which means they believed that because God is a forgiving God, it gave them the right to act however they pleased. But Jude sees it differently. God showed tremendous mercy on the children of Israel by bringing them out of Egypt, but their subsequent behavior got them a hot and sandy grave.

God’s act of loving forgiveness toward us does not always allow us to be shielded from the consequences of our own actions. God stands ready to forgive us all if we come to Him in love and surrender, but He loves us enough to allow us to sometimes learn that our sinful actions have rotten consequences.

Easter Reflection: Whose Story Will You Believe?

Our Easter text comes from John 20:1-10. Although there is much in this passage to discuss, I want to spend my space here talking about the reactions of Mary and the two disciples as they encountered the empty tomb.

As Mary comes early in the morning, she finds the stone has been rolled away and the tomb no longer holds the body of Jesus. Her first reaction is to run back to the disciples and tell them what she has found. Her tale is telling. Keep in mind that she, along with so many others have spend the better part of three years with Christ while he has taught them and the masses about who He is and the kind of Kingdom he is bringing. Among those teachings, we find at least three distinct times when Christ told them all that He would be betrayed, killed, and would rise from the dead. At this point, he was betrayed just like He said, and killed just like He said, and He has risen from the dead. But what is Mary’s story?

She tells the disciples Jesus’ body has been stolen. Before you worry too much about Mary’s faith, when John and Peter race to the tomb, we get this description, from John himself, about how he reacted, “and he believed…” (vs 8). Believed what? The next verse helps us answer the question. They did not yet understand that Christ would rise from the dead. When Scripture tells us John believed, it is not telling us that John had an amazing moment of faith, it is telling us he and Peter believed Mary’s story. We may be able to excuse Mary’s take on the resurrection because she may not have been in on all Christ’s discussions about His resurrection, but we cannot say the same for Peter and John-two of the closest disciples to Christ.

As the chapter proceeds, Christ reveals Himself to Mary and then to the disciples, and at the end of the chapter, Thomas enters the scene. This poor disciple has been given the unfortunate moniker “Doubting Thomas” because he refused to believe in the resurrection until he saw and felt Christ. But the same should be said for every other disciple!

I am struck by this question: why did Jesus allow Mary and the disciples to encounter and empty tomb before they encountered Him? Keep in mind Jesus has been up for a while now and if He has been just a little faster, or had not been stuck in traffic, He would have gotten to Mary and the disciples before they reached the tomb. He didn’t, though.

I believe Jesus was giving them a chance to believe the story He had been telling them for three years. Mary and the disciples, when they were confronted with the empty tomb, fell back to an easy and comfortable belief-that Jesus’ body had been stolen.

During Easter we are confronted with the same opportunity-will we believe the easy, human, politically correct version of Jesus’ story, or will we choose to believe what He has been trying to tell us for centuries? Our lives hang in the decision.

You will be able to find the audio of the sermon here.

Jude: Intro vs1-2

1Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, To those who are called, beloved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ: 2May mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you.

This past week we began a study on an oft-neglected book, the Epistle of Jude. This book is overlooked for many reasons, including its short length and the cryptic issues raised within the central portion of the letter. If we are careful, though, there is a lot to learn from this little epistle, and I think we will find it almost startlingly applicable.

First, a point that will make the study of Jude a little easier is that it is a close cousin to the longer 2 Peter. We will find that many of the issues raised in Jude in an almost shorthand fashion will be expounded upon in 2 Peter. The two letters are so close, that many scholars believe one letter borrowed from the other. There is much discussion about which came first, but generally it is believed that Jude was the original of the two.

Another point that will aid in our understanding of Jude is its relatively late date of authorship. Many evangelical scholars place the writing of Jude between the mid 60s A.D. to the mid 70s A.D. This little fact is helpful given the occasion and burden of Jude’s letter. He clearly states from the beginning that he is writing to encourage the believers to “earnestly contend for the faith” and be on guard against false teachers. Just a decade or two before, we know that there were false teachers following Paul and the other apostles corrupting the church. By the time we get to Jude and 2 Peter, it may be the case that the false teachers have become more organized and the need to consciously oppose them has become more pressing for the church.

Who were these false teachers? In our study we will discover plenty about these people, but we should make one point here. Part of what Jude may be dealing with is the very inception of the earliest and most predominant contender to Christianity-Gnosticism. As a systematized way of looking at the world, Gnosticism really won’t come into its own for a few decades, but it appears to be on the rise in the early church. Part of what make Jude so surprisingly applicable is that Gnosticism is still one of the most predominant religious contenders to Christianity. Its latest standard bearer is the philosophy behind The Da Vinci Code. The claims Dan Brown makes in that book are among the oldest contentions against Christianity on record. As our study progresses, we will get a chance to look more closely into the early Gnostic claims.

Before we finish, I want to make two points about the opening two verses. First, the author is most likely the half-brother of Jesus, and yet he does not identify himself as such. Among those who openly mocked Jesus during his earthly ministry, one of the identifiable groups is his brothers. More than likely, Jude (as well as James) were powerfully transformed by the death and resurrection of Christ and subsequently did not see fit to call themselves his brother. Instead, he calls himself a “bondservant” of Christ. What a powerful transformation must have taken place for one brother to see things this way!

Secondly, Jude makes use of the concept of “mercy” instead of the more familiar Pauline “grace” in his opening. Mercy, as the concept of “a loving act of forgiveness” will become an important concept for Jude before the book is through. This is important not to miss-though Jude is fascinating for its cryptic OT references and citations, that is not what Jude is after. He is after a sense of mercy and love pervading the church.

Jude has something profound and powerful to tell the Church even today.

Style Change

Due to my personal time constraints and further decision making on my part about the purpose of this blog, I have decided to change the direction of what I write here. I have intended in the past to simply “hit the highlights” of my talks, but I end up basically repeating my entire sermon on the blog. Clearly, that is not an addition to people’s study or the development of my own ideas and sermonizing. If you want the whole thing, you can find the audio on the QLCC web page. And in a technological twist of fate, if you own an iPod and subscribe to Podcasts, you will be able to subscribe to those sermons.

In any event, hopefully the change in format will be helpful toward the study and devotional life of those who decide to read the humble musings of a simple pastor.

1 Thessalonians 1:4-10

In this passage we will encounter some marvelous encouragement on behalf of Paul, and catch a glimpse of the life of the Thessalonians since he and his company left them.

First of all, I do not think it is insignificant that he labels them as “loved by God.” A little later on in the passage, he mentions the “sever suffering” they are enduring, and one can only imagine what a temptation it was for the young Thessalonian believers to not believe that they were loved by God. Doubtless they did not feel loved by God. Certainly if God was as good and as powerful as Paul described Him, they would not be suffering the way they were.

But Paul is able to say, in complete awareness of their situation and with complete confidence in the veracity of his words, they were loved by God.

We should never mistake our situation in life for God’s level of love for us. We should never equate difficult situations for a lack of love, and we should never limit God’s love to blessed situations. If we live in blessing and success all our lives, the truth will still hold that we will never understand the height, depth, and width of God’s love for us.

Do you need to be reminded that you are loved by God?

Paul also notes that the Thessalonians imitated him and his company well since they have been gone. Commentators will sometimes label Paul as one of the most arrogant men in Scripture for this kind of passage. You do not need to read through many of his epistles before you come across this kind of language. But what is often overlooked is the historical context in which Paul encouraged imitation and the Scriptural context in which he mentions imitation. As for historical context, Paul and company were likely the only examples the Thessalonians had for Christian behavior and lifestyle. If they did not imitate Paul, who were they going to imitate? And as for Scriptural context, when Paul mentions imitation, he never stops with himself. As here in 1 Thessalonians, he is always quick to take the young Christians beyond himself to Christ. Paul is far from arrogant (in the sense of the vice of pride)!

In his letters, Paul uses a range of vocabulary to describe the kinds of suffering he and the early believers endured. Here, when he calls it “severe suffering,” he is using about the most violent imagery he can. The verb form of this word is the word used in Greek for crushing grapes to make wine. And yet, the Thessalonians received the Word with joy! What an amazing reality. Where Paul reminded them not to equate their difficulty with a lack of God’s love, they had already disconnected their trials from their sense of joy.

As one final brief note on this passage (see the audio version for the whole study), the topic of God’s wrath shows up at the end of this chapter. Because the issues of the Day of the Lord and the Rapture will come up later, I will make one brief observation. The NT uses basically two concepts/words for wrath or anger. Thumos is intended to convey the kind of anger which arises quickly and dissipates quickly. Orge, which is the word of choice in contexts dealing with God’s final wrath against sin, describes an anger which is more of a state of mind. It is the kind of anger which builds up for a long time and has a great deal of intent and deliberation behind it. God’s wrath upon sin is an orge kind of anger.

What is marvelous, though, about orge is that those who place their trust in Christ are sparred from it. As with 1:10, God saves those who know Him from His final outpouring of wrath.

1 Thessalonians 1:2-3

As I began to work through this short passage I was struck by a handful of things, not the least of which was the trio of phrases, “work produced by faith…labor prompted by love…endurance inspired by hope.”

First of all, however, I think we should take notice again of Paul’s thanksgiving. He notes that every time he is reminded of the Thessalonians he is thankful for them. It might be hard for us to imagine the kind of encouragement this was for the young church. The were not that old in their faith, Paul and his group had by now all left them, and they were suffering “severe persecution.” In the midst of that, their founder writes and tells them that he is extremely thankful for them! We do not often think of thanksgiving as a spiritual discipline, but it is. It is a practice we find all over the Scriptures, and it is one of those exercises which makes us more like Christ and less like our own sinful nature. Being thankful makes us humble and less self-centered; and being thankful encourages others. We might have thanked God for something recently, but when was the last time you did what Paul does in our passage? When was the last time you told someone you were deeply thankful for them and why?

Practice thankfulness and thanksgiving!

Concerning this trio of ideas, we have a familiar list produced by Paul-faith, love and hope. We likely know of this same list in 1 Corinthians 13:13, but it appears a few more times together like this. Another is in Colossians 1:3-5. Each time it appears together like this it seems to put across a kind of short-hand for, “you are functioning the way you should be functioning.” Paul, then, is commending the Thessalonians in large part because the word he had preached had its intended result. They were more faithful, loving and hopeful.

In the Bible Study itself, we delved a little more into the specifics of faith, hope and love, but here I want to ask a question that I think is posed by the text of 1 and 2 Thessalonians. One thing we will discover is that though there appeared to be a large segment of the church which had responded well to the Gospel (and specifically the doctrine of the End), there seems to be a significant group which did not. We find one group characterized by faith, hope and love, and the second group characterized by anxiety, fear and sloth.

How does that happen? How is it that the same group of people hears the same message at the same time from the same person and is split into diametrically opposed reactions?

What I think we find in the text is that the difference begins and ends in the life of the believer’s mind. When Paul addressed those who were fearful and slothful, he not only dealt with their inappropriate behavior, he tried to correct their thinking about the doctrine. The reason we have a lot of end-times doctrine in these two books is because so many people were behaving badly.

Maladjusted thinking leads to maladjusted behavior. To readjust behavior, you must begin by readjusting thinking.

The first crowd was responding correctly to the doctrine because they grasped it well. So Paul only needed to commend them and encourage them to continue. The second group needed to have their behavior dealt with, so Paul condemned the behavior and tried to re-teach them.

The recent trend in evangelicalism of neglecting the life of the mind is leading to disastrous consequences. Many well known surveys make the point that the behavior between believers and non-believers is indistinguishable. Why? At least part of the reason is that most American Christians have quit letting the doctrines of God flood their minds and souls. They really don’t know or understand God, so how can we expect their behavior to be Godly? If Paul corrected thinking about doctrine in order to address poor behavior, I think that strategy is good enough for us as well.

1 Thessalonians 1:1

I. Background

It is profitable, and I think exciting, to take a big-picture look at Acts 15, 16, 17 and 18 as we begin this study. These chapters contain parts of Paul’s second missionary journey beginning with the conclusion of the Counsel at Jerusalem in Acts 15. From there Paul and his new partner Silas return to Asia Minor and begin to retrace Paul’s steps. Along the way they pick up a young man named Timothy, and the narration changes from “he” to “we.” For the next few chapters the group that is along for the missionary journey is comprised of (at least) Paul, Silas, Timothy, and Luke.

By the time Paul reaches Corinth, he has suffered persecution in Thessalonica and Berea, and frustration in Athens and Corinth. We get a glimpse of his mindset in 1 Corinthians 2:1-5 where he tells the Corinthians that by the time he got there he was resolved to speak nothing but Christ and Him crucified. He had decided that no matter what he did it would bring difficulty in his path, so he might as well preach Christ alone.

While he is in Corinth, Paul receives word from Timothy about the state of the church in Thessalonica. Apparently the word was relatively good. When Paul opens the epistle to the Thessalonians, he is thankful for their steadfastness and their faith. We can imagine Paul breathing a little fresh air as he hears that the last trip through all the persecution and difficulty had been worth it for the Thessalonican church.

II. Dating

Dealing with the dating of a book in the Bible is often tedious and boring work, but 1 Thessalonians has a certain payoff. Given some of the dating we are able to line up with secular history (as a result of Acts 18 and Paul’s trip to Corinth), many have concluded that 1 Thessalonians was written about 50 AD. What is interesting about that number is that, along with Galatians, 1 Thessalonians is likely the earliest written record we have of Christianity.

Look at it this way. In the Gospels we have the life and words of Christ. In the epistles what we have are the records of the apostles and the early church struggling to interpret and apply the life and words of Christ. When we read 1 Thessalonians, we are reading this process in its rawest of forms. In essence, the apostles were working with the same issues we are. We want to know what it means to be a Christian in our world-how does being a Christian make me different? That is exactly the issue Paul and the other apostles were addressing when they wrote to people who were pagan Greeks or Orthodox Jews just months before.

What makes me a Christian, and what does being a Christian make me?

III. 1:1

In this small verse we should pause and pay attention to what we might call Paul’s “assumptions” about the church. The first I want to mention is that he labeled the church as being “in God the Father.” The word “in” carries with it not only the sense of belonging to God, but dependence on God as well. The church begins and ends with God. There is a great deal of pressure in our culture to reshape church in anthropocentric terms-to make people the focus of church in inappropriate ways. Paul’s vision is very different. The church is always theocentric. It is always about and for God and everything else flows from there. The church exists because of the will and work of God, and for the will and work of God. Os Guiness put it this way when he said that when we make the masses sovereign instead of the message, we have lost the focus and purpose of the Church.

And then there is the “tag line” of “Grace and Peace to you.” With phrases as common and simple as this one, it is easy to gloss over it and loose its intended impact. These terms for Paul have theological content, and are not simple greetings. One way to look at this line is as if Paul is saying, “I pray that God’s work among you would continue (grace), and that the natural consequences of His work would take hold (peace).” I want to leave off my thoughts with a passage from Isaiah about peace. I love this passage in part because it gives me a condition-it gives me something I can check in my life to see whether I am succeeding or falling short of the goal.

Isaiah 26:3 (ESV)
You keep him in perfect peace
whose mind is stayed on you,
because he trusts in you.

Ruth 4

Ruth 4

Ruth chapter four opens with the dawn that closes chapter three. In the middle of the previous night, Ruth and Boaz had their encounter and proposal of marriage. Early that morning Ruth returns to Naomi, and Naomi declares that the sun will not set again until Boaz has settled the matter one way or the other. In the misty dawn of that very day while Ruth and Naomi celebrate their possibilities, Boaz is on his way to the city gate.

It is there where Boaz will be able to official transact the business which has to do with not only Ruth’s status, but Naomi’s land as well. As he is on his way, he sees the kinsman-redeemer he referred to in chapter three, and he calls him over to the gate. Interestingly, he does not give him a name. Clearly he not only has a name, but Boaz would have known it. They were related, after all. So why no name? Given the laws of redemption and levarite marriage, the fact that his unnamed man does not follow through on his duty to his family would lead to disgrace. Or as the NIV puts it, his would then be known as the “Family of the Unsandled” (Deut 25). So we may guess that the author has spared this man’s family from lasting shame by not naming him. Another guess is that it is a kind of subtle judgment on his refusal to marry Ruth. The man tells Boaz that if he marries Ruth, his own family line would be thinned, and he is not willing to do that. In order to save his own family name, his name is lost forever. We all know Boaz and the extraordinary deeds he performs, but none of us know that other guy who refused to show hesed to Ruth and Naomi.

This portion of the story provides a good place to talk about Christ in the pages of Ruth. First, a word of caution. Looking for types in the OT is a fun and sometimes rewarding process, but it can easily be taken to extremes. There are a few types we know for sure are in the OT because they are mentioned in the New, and there are a few which are pretty obviously types, but are not specifically mentioned as such in the New Testament. The book of Ruth falls into the second category. Because of its typology, many have gone a little overboard with finding details in the OT text and allegorizing them into the Gospel account. I would warn against doing that for a couple of reasons. First, it obscures the intent and message of the original text, and second, because it becomes rampant speculation and has little to no grounding in Scripture.

With all that said, this vignette in Ruth is probably the clearest type of Christ and our relationship to the Law in the book. In essence, before Boaz is able to redeem the land and take a gentile bride, the first kinsman-redeemer had to be shown inadequate to the task. Relating that to the Gospel, what the Law was unable to do, Christ did. The Law exists to prove to us that we need a savior, and that it is unable to be that savior. Romans 3 and 8 make that point clearly. Another interesting passage regarding this relationship between us, Christ, and the Law is Hebrews 7. In that chapter, the author of Hebrews is pointing out that Christ had to come because the Law was “set up to fail.” We needed an indestructible priest, not one we had to replace every generation.

Additionally, the issue of Boaz and Christ being kinsman-redeemers is important. One of the great Christian minds, Anselm, wrote a work in the Middle Ages entitled, “Why the God Man?” His answer, in a nutshell, was that God needed to come to earth in human flesh in order to redeem us. (Redemption simply means, “to buy back,” “to restore to original state.”) Hebrews chapter 2 makes that point. Christ came in human flesh and was honored to call us brothers.

What an amazing thing, that God would condescend to human flesh just to bring us back to where He intended us to be-back to what he created us for!

So, back to the story of Ruth.

I find it telling that the book opens and closes with Naomi. Ruth and Boaz have a child, but the child finds itself on Naomi’s lap. In addition, the women of the town are calling it Naomi’s child. This is appropriate and telling in a couple of respects. First, Boaz fulfilled his levarite responsibility by “giving” the child to Naomi and her deceased family. Secondly, it continues to highlight the amazing hesed Ruth is showing Naomi. Through the kindness and humility of Ruth, we find a completely restored Naomi at the end of the book. Not only is her belly filled, but now her home is as well.

Sometimes God puts a similar kind of call on our lives. We are all called to be priests-we believe in the “priesthood of all believers”-and we are all called to serve God’s kingdom on earth somehow. And from time to time it requires a Ruth-like willingness to fade into the background while God works amazing things in the lives of those around us. Recall that up to this point, Ruth was a widow in a foreign country. After her marriage to Boaz she could have left Naomi and taken the child as her own. That would have been nice for Ruth, but it would have obstructed what God wanted to do for Naomi. The kind of act taken by Ruth was not only a key component to God’s work in another’s life, but it took a lot of humility. Not everyone is willing or able to fade into the background while all the attention seems to be headed in the direction of another.

Take for instance Augustine. You have probably heard of Augustine-one of the luminaries of Christian theology and philosophy almost 2000 years after his death. But have you heard of Bishop Ambrose? If you have read The Confessions, you have. Augustine credits a lot of his spiritual journey toward Christ, and then toward maturity to the influence of Ambrose. Without a person willing to minister in Ambrose’s position, we might not have someone like Augustine.

God may not make us all fulfill that kind of role with our life’s work, but I believe from time to time we all need to fade into the background and allow God to do something wonderful in someone else’s life.

Ruth 3

This chapter poses a couple of difficulties from the outset for a Bible Study. First, it seems fairly straightforward and possibly even mundane on one level. It is a story of a marriage proposition, and a short one at that. Secondly, it is loaded with sexual tension, and intentionally so. So what are we to make of this plan concocted by Naomi and enacted by Ruth?

I want to address the second issue first so we will be able to give ample attention to the first. Naomi’s plan is an infamous one. Chapter three opens with Naomi deciding that it is time for Ruth to settle down with the man who will not only be able to provide Ruth with a stable home, but will also possibly provide Naomi with a renewed family hope. The implications of a marriage between Boaz and Ruth are not lost on Naomi. In the midst of explaining her plan to Ruth she calls Boaz, “a kinsman of ours” (vs. 2). Recall that the point of the Levarite marriage was to continue a particular family unit, not just the broader family name. When the brother dies and the brother-in-law and the widow give birth to a firstborn, that firstborn belongs to the deceased brother and not the brother-in-law. Naomi is on the verge of having her family restored to her.

So in order to accomplish this goal of a marriage between Ruth and Boaz Naomi suggests a plan of action that contains a few distinct components. First, Ruth should go and find Boaz at the threshing floor. Second, she should remain hidden until she can deal with Boaz one-on-one. Third, she is to uncover his feet while he sleeps in order to gain his attention and make the proposal. There is no getting around the fact that this plan has plenty of sexual innuendo built into it. First, when women and threshing floors are put together, the Old Testament sees that as a common situation for prostitution (e.g. Hosea 9:1). Secondly, the phrase “uncover his feet” is very similar to other euphemisms in the OT which pretty clearly intend to convey genitalia and sexuality. So, did Ruth and Boaz have a sexual encounter that night (and, more to the point, was it intentional)?

I want to make a couple of points about this aspect of the story. Recall that the book of Ruth is best described as a “short story,” and is a well-crafted one at that. I believe the physical tension built into this chapter serves the story by furthering the romance and relationship between Ruth and Boaz. There is more than just a marriage of family honor at stake here. There is real physical and personal chemistry involved. We are to believe that their relationship is the complete package of family ties, legal and cultural code, and intimate love.

As for the direct question itself, I think the text clears up the tension a little later on when Boaz responds to Ruth’s proposal. In verse 11 Boaz refers to her as a woman of “noble character.” Despite the cultural differences between the modern reader and ancient Israel, fornication would have been an ignoble thing in Boaz’s eyes. I am not so sure Boaz would have referred to her as noble if she had played the prostitute that night. Secondly, when he encourages her to stay the night, the text could have used any other phrase laced with sexual overtones, but it uses a rather mundane phrase for “lodge here” for the night. And finally, Boaz encourages Ruth to leave the threshing floor before anyone else wakes up and realizes there is a woman there, thus protecting her noble character from the allegation of prostitution.

After the study, a member of the group brought up an interesting point. It might be possible that Naomi was still thinking more like a Moabite than an upstanding Israelite when she concocted the plan for Ruth. In essence, it is possible that Naomi’s intent was sexual in nature, but Ruth’s execution of the plan was not.

As for the story in chapter three itself I would like to briefly discuss Naomi and Boaz in relation to their prayers for Ruth in chapters one and two, and them Naomi herself and her metamorphosis since the end of chapter one.

When Naomi tells Ruth it is time for her to “try to find a home for [Ruth],” it conjures up images of her prayer for Orpah and Ruth in chapter one. There, on their way back to Bethlehem, Naomi releases them with the prayer, “May the LORD grant that each of you will find rest in the home of another husband” (vs. 9). The phrases, “find a home” and “find rest” are similar to each other, and the second is intended to make us recall the first. In Ruth’s request to Boaz we read these words, “spread your garment over me” (vs. 9). Here, Ruth has turned Boaz’s prayer in 2:12, “May the LORD repay you…under whose wings you have come to take refuge."

In both cases, we find that God has begun to use the people who prayed over Ruth as instruments toward the fulfillment of those prayers. In a sense, Naomi and Boaz have become the answers to their own prayers. I think from time to time when we pray for things or for people, we inadvertently imagine that God will accomplish our prayer behind the scenes in some kind of mystical and quiet sort of way. As we see with Naomi and Boaz, though, God will often use us to help bring about the answers to our prayers. Be alert as you pray-God may be at work in you to do what is in your hand to do!

And finally, I want to turn our attention to Naomi one more time. At the end of chapter one, we saw an embittered woman who considered God her enemy. Chapter two opens with her conspicuous silence. She was in a position to help Ruth, but she does not. Then as chapter two closes, we see a glimmer of hope in Naomi. And then with the opening of chapter three, we see a fully-engaged Naomi who sees potential for her family and for Ruth as a result of Boaz’s kindness. She is now ready and willing to get involved with the rest of the world, and ultimately, with God’s plan for her and Ruth. Ruth and Boaz’s kindness and godliness have given Naomi hope, and hope has changed her.

Hope is a Christian virtue we do not talk about often. We discuss faith and love, but we do not tend to ponder hope. Christians are often chided for having a kind of “pie-in-the-sky” view of life because of our need to be hopeful. It is assumed that to hope is to believe that everything will come up roses, or that we will always get the raise, or things will always go our way. I think it is interesting to note that the one book outside of Psalms which deals the most with the idea of hope is Job. In that book, Job and his interlocutors pray for hope, cling to hope, deride hope, and reflect on hope. Although Job’s life is restored to him, it is during the trial that he tries to come to terms with his hope in God.

What is hope from a biblical point of view? I think one way of seeing it is that hope is the deep and abiding hope that God’s plan is always right and good. (Keep in mind how I am not using “good.” “Good” in this context does not mean anything like “easy,” “comfortable,” etc.) It is deep and abiding because it touches every aspect of our lives and is stronger than any trial we endure. For further reflections on hope, I want to refer you to another blog of mine.

To bring this brief reflection on hope back to the book of Ruth, I want to reference Psalm 119:74, “May those who fear you rejoice when they see me, for I have put my hope in your word.” People can be changed because of the hope they see in us, as individuals and as a community of believers. Have you lost hope? God, in His unceasing grace and love will work to restore it. Are you a touchstone for other’s hope? Are they able to see you and rejoice because you have put your hope in God’s word?

Ruth 2-God at Work Through Character

In these first few verses of chapter 2, we are going to pay attention to the characters of Ruth and Boaz. As in the last chapter, if we do not stop to pay attention to the simple, almost mundane, things of the book of Ruth, the story will pass us by. Instead of seeing this as just a simple and pastoral short story, God Himself will be revealed to us as the hero of the ordinary life which is submitted to Him.

As for Ruth, the text simply jumps into her decision to head out to the fields. It is almost as if she arrived in Bethlehem, woke up the next morning, and asked for Naomi’s blessing to go and glean in whatever field she could. It is worth notice, I believe, that Naomi did not guide Ruth. Note also that now the roles of the two are reversed. In chapter one Naomi was the widow in a foreign land, and now the text notes that Ruth, the Moabitess, is now in that position. And yet her reaction is one of humility and industry-even when Naomi does not have the strength or the desire to guide her to the nearest family member who could help.

It is often noted that Ruth’s choice is one full of humility and industry. It was a humble choice in large part because she is willingly taking on the task of a beggar who is desperate to feed themselves. It is an industrious act in large part because Naomi has not helped her (either due to age or possibly her bitterness). As Ruth goes to glean in the fields, imaging the harvesters standing and bending over to gather the sheaves, and then imagine a foreign girl on her hands and knees behind them picking up single grains out of the dirt. Lessons like humility and industry are not among the spectacular and crowd-gathering lessons of Scripture, but we will find that these traits were necessary attributes in Ruth in order for God to accomplish His task. (1 Thess. 4:11-12)

As for Boaz, I think a lot can be learned from his first recorded conversation. He and his harvesters greet one another with God on their lips. Boaz is on a business trip to catch up on how the harvest is going, he is not on his way to Synagogue or to the priests. Even so, God is the first thing out of his mouth. Some might pass this over by thinking that it is simply a part of their culture, but that is exactly the point I want to make. Boaz is a part of a culture which has been shaped to saturate its people with the presence and mind of God. (We will see in Boaz a strong, moral character as we continue.) One may see this as simply a part of their culture, but there is nothing simplistic about it.

God went to great lengths to create a culture where His people would be confronted with His reality all the time. Take the familiar passage of Deuteronomy 6:4-9 for instance. The Shemah is not only a memorable phrase which could be easily memorized and confessed, it is a powerful bit of theology and metaphysical ontology. So what does God intend for this bit of theology? He requires that it be taught to children, that it be talked about when you wake up, when you go to the market, when you go to bed-and on it goes. God intended for Himself to be at the forefront of the Hebrew mind and heart all the time.

The New Testament knows something of this as well. In another well-known passage, 1 Thess. 5:16-18, Paul encourages us to be joyful always, to pray always, and to give thanks always. There is no practical way of doing this except to change the way we see the world and put God at the center of it all. Brother Lawrence once said that he determined to make God the aim of all his thoughts and the end of all his actions. He wanted to do and think nothing that did not end up with and in God. Cardinal Suhard said that the best way to be a living witness is not to spread propaganda and not to stir up emotions, but to be a “living mystery.” He said that we should live our lives in such a way that they do not make sense if God does not exist. Does your life only make sense if God is real?

By verse 13 of the second chapter, Ruth and Boaz have met and the stage is set of the happy ending of chapter 4. But note that this only happened because of the ordinary virtues of humility and industry found in Ruth, the God-saturated attitude of Boaz, and of course, the plot-twist of the entire story, the “as it turned out” moment (vs. 3). God is at work in what seems to be a simple act of luck or coincidence (some translations put it, “as luck would have it”). So the unseen hero so far is God Himself.

In closing I want to make this point about the will of God being revealed and understood in our lives. I have made the point that one of the reasons I like the book of Ruth is that it is so much like my life in the sense that there is nothing overtly supernatural about the hand of God in the story. The same is true for the unfolding of God’s will in Ruth’s life. God’s will is not revealed in a momentary peal of thunder or a vision in the night, instead it is unrolled like a scroll day by day.

(Credit to Alister Begg for that last phrase)

Ruth 1-God At Work In The Ordinary

As I spent time preparing for the book of Ruth, I must admit that I was caught a little off guard with how the book struck me. I guess more appropriately, I was not expecting Ruth to strike me so forcefully. All in all, it has been impressed upon me that Ruth is about the providence and grace of God, not in spite of the simple and pastoral setting of Ruth, but because of it. As I put my notes together for the first study, I decided that a good way to categorize Ruth is “God in the Ordinary.” Through the lives of the characters we are able to watch as common people deal with their lives and how they and God interact.

I guess what strikes me most about Ruth is that it is very much like my life. It has been noted that there are no miraculous events in the book-there are no floating axe heads, no arms growing out of stumps, and no cracking of the sky for the audible voice of God. In fact, if the reader is caught up in looking for God in the spectacular (either in Ruth or in their own lives) they will miss God entirely. Again, that sounds a lot like my life. A common mistake that Ruth will try to correct in us is that we cannot equate the ordinary with the unimportant.

For an mp3 file of the entire Study, visit here. I would like to make just a couple of observations about the beginning of the book.

A character that can easily be looked over is Naomi. After all, the book is about Ruth, Boaz, and ultimately, David. But we should not loose sight of what God does in her life through the course of the book. Chapter 1 serves as a wonderfully crafted insight into her life and state of mind. It begins with famine and a family exodus, and it closes with the return of the barley harvest and a homecoming and what happens in between those bookends is undeniably tragic. Naomi, almost mysteriously, looses her husband and two sons and is left without family in a foreign land.

How does Naomi respond to tragedy? She says that the Lord’s hand has gone out against her (vs. 13) and later she attributes all the tragedy in her life to God alone, “I went away full, but the Lord has brought me back empty….The Lord has afflicted me; the Almighty has brought misfortune upon me.” (vs. 21) That reaction has a familiar ring for me. I think it is easy for people to blame God for misfortune and tragedy, and yet, it is not so easy for people to thank God for blessing. Nonetheless, at this point in the story, God is Naomi’s enemy. At least, that is how she sees it. As chapter 1 closes Naomi may be home in Bethlehem, but she has become embittered against God.

If, however, we fast forward to the end of the book and look at 4:17, we see that things have changed, and given other conversations through the book, we discover that Naomi and God have been reconciled, so to speak. The question then is, how did God go from being Naomi’s enemy to her friend?

I think the answer lies in Naomi’s relationship with Boaz. Her sentiments are revealed in statements like, “The Lord bless him!...He has not stopped showing his kindness to the living and the dead.” (2:20) Keeping with the nature of the book, Naomi’s relationship with God is not reconciled through a vision or a dream or a prophet-she is brought back to God through the kindness and faithfulness of another. In more common terminology for us, Naomi’s relationship with God is restored in large part through the Christ-likeness of another believer.

Ultimately, Naomi should not have blamed God. God does not curse or tempt even though His plan can feel like it from time to time. But even while Naomi is caught up in her bitterness, God takes the time to reach out to her through the lives of common and ordinary people. God wraps His arms around her through the kindness and loyalty of Ruth, and restores her family and livelihood through the generosity and love of Boaz.

May we see God in the ordinary things of our lives, and may we be God’s grace and love to those He beings across our paths!