LITERALLY OR SERIOUSLY?

Here's another worthwhile aphorism from Dr. John Walton: 

Some insist that we read the Bible literally, 

but it is better to read the Bible seriously.

To read the Bible seriously, we must give thought to which parts of Scripture the original authors meant for their original audience to take literally and which parts were meant to be understood figuratively.

The strict literalist never entertains such questioning. To their way of thinking, unless the Scripture on the table is poetry or a parable, it is meant to be taken literally.

This is pure ignorance. 

Literally. 

It is a lack of awareness of differences in cultures and literary genres, and a lack of imagination regarding the nature of God's revelation. 

HOUSE OR HOME

In an attempt to persuade the diehard You-Must-Believe-the-Earth-Is-4,000 Years-Old crowd, Dr. John Walton asks this question: what sort of origin story is the book of Genesis trying to tell? 

Is it telling the story of a house or a home?

If it's the story of a house, then factual data regarding materials used, the date it was built, who did the work, and the actual blueprints would be all you need.

But if it's telling a story of how a home came to be, none of that matters to any great extent.

Instead, you'd expect to hear about the various individuals in the house and their relationships to each other along with any significant milestones in the life of that family. 

If we read Genesis as a "house story", we overlook the main thrust of the history and miss the point entirely.

IN JESUS' NAME

 I am beginning to see how the theme of humanity being created in God's image - which is introduced in Genesis 1 - carries through the entire Bible and finds expression in various key passages.

When we understand that we were created to represent God and His priorities here on this earth, then we get a deeper and more accurate understanding of what Jesus meant in John 14:

12 Truly, truly, I tell you, whoever believes in Me will also do the works that I am doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in My name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask Me for anything in My name, I will do it.

Now that Jesus has come to redeem humanity from sin and death and has paved the way with his own death and resurrection, He has gained "all authority in heaven and on earth". He passes along His authority to the members of His body, whenever we are doing good work "in His name". 

So when we ask for His help in these endeavors - wherever the Kingdom is advancing or where order is being brought from chaos - then we can be confident in His affirmative answer. 

Understood in this vein, it's easy to see why Jesus answering prayers asked "in His name" would ultimately bring glory to the Father, the One who initiated this mission of advancing His Kingdom.

So why have we reduced "in Jesus' name" in our understanding to three magic words with which to end our prayers?

BANQUET UNDER MURPHY'S LAW

Tonight my mission agency hosted its annual spring fundraising banquet and 99% of what could go wrong DID go wrong.

Both the catered dinner and the program fell apart. 

From my perspective, it was an absolute train wreck of an evening. 

Still, the Spirit managed to keep me fairly unruffled. I was smiling through it all. I give Him all the credit. 

I figure that God still gets His work done, even when it's obvious to the whole world how rough His clay vessels are.

I guess there were a few things that went right.

The florist did a great job decorating the tables and it was all done well before anyone arrived for the event. 

There was plenty of time for fellowship around the tables.

Six teens came from my church to help serve for the evening. They had a wonderful spirit. 

But for my money, the true highlight of the evening was my son Samuel getting up to address the crowd about why he supports Mission Resource even as a college student with bills to pay. I know I am biased, but if Samuel had been the whole program, the event might have been a smashing success. 

Still, I believe God has His reasons for allowing what He allows and He brings good out of the worst circumstances. Perhaps the coming weeks will reveal why the train was allowed off its tracks and what good came from tonight. 

I hope so. 

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HEAVEN

One of the biggest misunderstandings in modern Christianity is that believers can look forward to an eternity in heaven. 

Eternal life is promised, yes, but not in heaven.

It will be right here on earth. (Granted, the earth is due for a major makeover before eternity starts, but still - we aren't going anywhere.)

The book of Revelation makes it clear that after the rule of Satan and death are ultimately defeated, we won't be joining God in heaven. Instead, God will be coming to join us on the earth:

21:2 I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying: “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man, and He will dwell with them. They will be His people, and God Himself will be with them as their God.

If we understood this reality, it might help quash some of the escapist tendencies of Christians who think that some fine morning they will get to just fly away so why get overly involved here in the meantime? 

We have plenty of work to do in the here and now. We are to spend our energies growing the Kingdom of God and, thus, moving this earth ever closer to the day when God's will is done here as it is in heaven. 

This world IS our home. We need to get to work.

MY BULLY

I only ever suffered one true bully during my years at Pearson Elementary School. But he was consistent. 

I was terrified of him and his big square head. I don't remember him doing anything to me in the presence of a teacher, but he made every recess and the minutes immediately before and after school miserable for me. 

If he had any friends, I was unaware of them. I'm not sure he wanted any friends - I don't know if he actually liked anyone. 

I recall that he hated our third grade teacher, Mrs. Kemper. (But we all did.) One day she suddenly left the classroom for some unknown reason and this kid took advantage of the opportunity by standing up, unzipping his pants, and leaving a small puddle of urine in the middle aisle between the columns of desks. When Mrs. Kemper returned a few minutes later, she stepped in the middle of it on her way back to her desk. 

She never gave the slightest indication that she noticed the puddle or knew what it was.

As for me, although my bully often threatened to beat me up, he never hit me. But it was enough to make his very presence intimidating to me day after day. 

One time as we walked to school, my older brother Spencer hit my bully with a metal lunch box in an effort to chase him off. It left a dent in the lunch box. The next day this kid's mom yelled at Spencer for bullying her baby boy. 

Spencer was my hero for while.

It's funny now to reflect on how pressing, urgent, scary, and traumatic the day to day events of childhood could be. 

Anyway, all this went through my head the other day when my bully's name popped up among all the people who wished me a happy 56th birthday on Facebook. 

I gave his birthday wish a "💗". 

I think he's an insurance salesman now. 

LIKE FICTION

Here's a line from Old Testament scholar Michael Heiser which I plan to hold onto:

"Read your Bible like it's fiction."

It's clever, meant to provoke a strong reaction - especially from those who claim to be the most serious about the Bible.

And those are the ones Heiser wants to challenge most.

Far too many evangelicals seem to believe that a "high view of Scripture" is one which requires reading the Bible as woodenly as possible, as if it were a divine textbook and their goal is to discern a handful of doctrines which will appear on the final exam. 

[Side note: Once these readers of wooden Bible verses discover these doctrines, they often use them to clobber each other over the head. Each is certain the doctrines they have discovered are exactly what will appear on the test.]

Heiser suggests a more fruitful approach: something akin to the way we read a good novel.

We seem to understand instinctively when we read fiction that exposition matters, that foreshadowing is meant to keep us guessing, that themes are developed slowly, that settings convey meaning, and that character and motivation need careful attention. 

Scripture is wonderfully rich and it is crafted for maximum impact. 

More impact than we are getting when we pluck verses from here and there to construct a "doctrine" of this or that - or even, I would dare say, merely to discover a "life application".

A GAMBLE

One of the biggest objections to the idea of the existence of God is the whole problem of evil. 

As I have been thinking about the creation account in Genesis recently, I can't help but wonder: Would it even be possible for God to create any other sentient beings with free wills - either spiritual beings or humankind - without the real risk of those beings introducing disobedience into the equation?

Why? Because God is perfect. And yet by definition, He cannot create another perfect being. Any being He creates is necessarily going to be lesser than He is and, thus, imperfect. 

An imperfect being is bound to exhibit imperfect obedience toward its Creator. Thus, sin - and suffering - are guaranteed. 

And that suffering is going to touch both the creature and its Creator.

Dr. Michael Heiser points out in his book Unseen Realms that God was at no risk of being directly harmed by His creatures, but "He can be grieved". 

The creature, on the other hand, is at risk of being harmed and being grieved as well as causing harm to others. 

It seems unavoidable to me. It's a gamble.

It also seems very much like the reality faced by a young couple when they decide to bring a baby into the world. 

PREACHING IS EXCITING

I can get stirred up sometimes on Saturday nights, in anticipation of preaching on Sunday mornings. 

A couple of things in particular get me excited:

#1 - Passing along whatever I have been learning recently about the Bible - which is an endlessly fascinating book. I know some pastors like to recycle old sermons whenever they are in a new context, but I would much rather be working with fresh insights. There's always more to discover.

#2 - The possibility that I could play a role in someone else's "lightbulb moment". You know those moments - while reading a book, or hearing a friend's perspective, or listening to a deep sermon - when an idea grabs you and you just know in that moment that somehow your view of reality has just shifted towards greater clarity? Sometimes it's a novel framework rushing at you out of left field but sometimes it's a familiar concept that grabs your imagination in a new way. Either one is welcome on a Sunday morning.

How exciting it is to stand and deliver a message which, on any particular Sunday morning, the Spirit may use to propel a lost soul into the Kingdom or to drive a saved soul into new depths of Truth!

There is nothing like it.

BACK HOME AGAIN

According to Google Memories, we have been back in our house in Columbus for four years now. 

What a mix of emotions. 

On the one hand, what a blessing it was to have a familiar place to "come home to" after leaving Haiti so unexpectedly, especially as Covid was turning everything upside down. (We had been renting the house out the entire time we were in Haiti. Our last tenant moved out for his own reasons just three days before we arrived back in town.)

But on the other hand, I never anticipated living here again. I don't want to sound ungrateful, but it's not a house I want to grow old in.

I miss Haiti. I miss the school. I miss working alongside my wife. I miss our Haitian friends and the community of missionaries. 

Strangely, I even miss the daily struggle of life in an impoverished country. 

LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE

Genesis 1:26 -

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

As I am focused on Genesis 1:26-31 this week in preparation for Sunday morning, I am reminded of my freshman year at Wabash College and getting shot down by a professor in front of my classmates.

The class was called "Cultures and Traditions" and we were looking at the "creation myth" in the Old Testament. The professor could hardly wait to discuss verse 26 and the plural in "Let us make man in our image". 

"Considering Judaism is a famously monotheistic religion," she asked, "why would God speak in the plural here?"

Nobody responded, so I tentatively put my hand up and answered, "Maybe this is an early reference to the Trinity."

Dr. Butler scoffed. No, the concept of one God in three persons is completely foreign to the Old Testament, she explained.

(I didn't have the guts to point out the Spirit of God makes His first appearance hovering over the deep in the second verse of the book!)

What was her explanation? The plural was a remnant of the fact that Judaism had evolved - according to her - from polytheistic roots. 

Even as a timid college freshman, I knew that was a pretty dumb idea. So someone just forgot to go back and clean up a couple of random plural pronouns leftover from earlier polytheistic drafts? Really?

I have been looking over the matter this week and I find that scholars are not at all united on any particular theory about that plural. A few agree with my freshman self that it is an early sign of a trinitarian conception of God. 

But others have suggested  - and I find this theory interesting - that God is speaking to the earth itself. God forms a creature which is a combination of spirit and dirt, resulting in Adam being "in the image" of both. 

Some scholars also posit that the plural is simply a "royal 'we'" or that it is simply meant to illustrate great deliberation over this part of His creation. (I guess He's sort of talking to Himself in order to focus?)

One of the other leading candidates is that God employs the plural because He is holding council with the angels. 

Certainly, the passage does not specify that angels were present, but the existence of "the heavenly host" is acknowledged in Scripture elsewhere. And there's no reason to question their existence as having begun prior to the creation of man. 

Since this final theory has the advantage of lining up with the traditional Jewish interpretation of this crucial moment on the sixth day of creation, it carries a little more weight in my mind. After all, "Scripture was written for us but not to us", and so it does matter how the original audience would have understood this moment. 

FOSTERING FRIENDSHIPS

If there is one thing Covid brought home to me it is that I - even as an avowed introvert - NEED friendly physical human interaction. 

And even though "social distancing" is starting to pass into memory, when you stack our ongoing and ever-growing reliance on technology on top of the estrangement lingering from the days of pandemic and it feels like even the extroverts are starting to lose genuine connections to other people. 

(And half the population has a third strike against them: being males. We are just too often resigned to a daily life lacking in close friendships.)

Fortunately, I can report that I myself have been making gains in the friendship department this past year. I have made intentional effort to stay in weekly contact with a few of my closest friends who now live at a distance. Plus, my work with Mission Resource in Columbus and my role as pastor in Sardinia have both been forcing me out into the local community. 

And it's all good. 

I even found a surprising source of new friendships - a local chapter of Business Network International. 

BNI is a global organization designed to give business people an environment in which to foster trust and, subsequently, generate business referrals. 

I have represented Mission Resource at one of three BNI chapters here in Columbus for almost a year now and even though the meetings are at 7:00 Tuesday mornings, I can honestly say that I look forward to those gatherings every week.

Among other things, BNI encourages members to schedule one-to-one meetings with other chapter members on a weekly basis. We meet in each others' offices or go out for lunch or coffee, and we talk.

We talk about life and business and kids and the state of the world and - sometimes - even faith. 

And, slowly, new friendships are forming for me. 

It has reminded me that it is up to each of us to prioritize reaching out in search of friendly connections. This culture desperately needs us to make the effort.

Here's a great little article from Joshua Becker at the Becoming Minimalist website that points us in the right direction if we want to foster more friendships. 

RITUAL, THEN DISCIPLINE

I recently came across Dr. Michael Heiser for the first time. I am just starting to explore his material but what I have seen so far has been top-notch.

One of his emphases is on moving beyond personal "Bible reading" to "Bible study". Heiser rightly points out they are not the same thing.

In his compact book Brief Insights on Mastering Bible Study, the author entitles his 4th chapter "Bible Study is a Discipline, Not a Ritual Event".

He writes:

I am of the opinion that most people are not likely to move directly from zero to full-speed ahead when it comes to Bible study. Establishing a routine can only help. 

My dissertation is going to be designed to help individuals create and sustain a simple Bible habit. A ritual. 

But the end goal is to get people hooked on the Bible. A discipline.

Regular delving into Scripture --> Hearing from God --> Craving more --> Ever deeper study.

TAKING A NAME

How often do we mistake cultural assumptions for biblical truths? And how is it that professed "people of the Book" can go years - sometimes even their entire lives - without questioning any of those assumptions?

I think the poster child for this sort of profound oversight might be the second commandment:

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain. (Exodus 20:7)

Why do we think that what is meant here is that God is deeply offended whenever someone smashes their thumb with a hammer and angrily screams out "Jesus Christ!"?

I mean that is bad and shouldn't be done, but do we ever ask why such a sin made it on God's Top Ten? And at the number two spot, no less!

I first really started to question this when I moved to Haiti years ago. I noticed that Haitians simply don't have a habit of using Jesus' name as a curse word. It's an American thing. Maybe some additional cultures do the same, but it's not even a temptation in others.

And I couldn't imagine that any ancient Israelite was tempted to shout "Yahweh!" upon stubbing a toe.

Why do we assume that "taking" the Lord's name has something to do with speech? Where else do we use "take" as a synonym for "say"? 

(Maybe there are some instances, but I can't think of any off hand. Let me know if you can think of one.)

We do, however, speak of a woman "taking" her husband's name in a marriage ceremony. It has nothing to do with her saying her husband's name. 

It has everything to do with claiming a relationship to him, identifying with him, and being bound and committed to him. 

To take God's name upon yourself in this sense and then to bring shame upon it or to act in a manner unworthy of it - now that seems to merit being on the Top Ten.

Right after "Thou shall have no other God before me". 

"FOR" US, NOT "TO" US

I have heard several theologians express a concept which I have concluded is pretty darn important:

"The Bible was written FOR us, but not TO us."

This is meant to be a reminder that when reading the Bible we must be conscious of how far removed the original audience is from us in time, culture, and worldview. 

This should humble us and drive us into probability thinking when interpreting and applying Scripture, especially those passages which are more obscure. 

This is where I think Ken Hamm and most "young earth creationists" miss the boat (so to speak!) when it comes to interpreting Genesis 1. I think it is safe to say a scientific explanation detailing the order of earth's creation with a timeline of each step was nowhere in mind for Moses or whoever might have written the opening words of the Old Testament.

It's a better guess that the Hebrew people were much more concerned with God's power to transform chaos, His ability to defeat various local gods depicted in the account, and His authority over His creation as well as how distinct He is from it. 

The Bible was written for us, but not to us.

IN THE BEGINNING

Do you have a pet peeve? Some odd little thing that gets under your skin? Something which rolls right off the back of most people, but drives you into temporary insanity?

Someone popping bubble gum? The misuse of a particular word? (Like saying “I could care less” when you really mean “I couldn’t care less”.) Cracking of knuckles? Chewing with the mouth open?

For me, it is being late to a movie. I want to be early. I want to see every single trailer for coming attractions. If I miss even the first two minutes of a movie, I would rather turn around and go home.

I remember walking in late to the first Lord of the Rings movie. The theater was dark, there was a battle raging on screen, and a narrator already well into a lengthy explanation of the background story.

And we had missed it! I did not even know how much I had missed – just that I had missed some key information. I was here to hear a story about delivering some sort of ring somewhere – a story that would stretch out over 3 movies totaling 9 hours - and I had missed the significance of the ring itself! 

When the DVD came out, I couldn’t wait to see what I had missed.

Why do I bring this up?

It’s because I see the Bible – Old Testament and New together – as being a single, coherent, epic story. 

Now it’s not quite the same as my experience with Lord of the Rings in that EVERYONE has seen the opening of the Bible: “In the beginning the Lord created the heavens and the earth.” And then the 6 days of creation are explained.

But we’ve been misdirected, somehow. Almost like instead of missing the opening of the Bible's story entirely, we have accidentally watched the opening to some other movie. 

In the case of Genesis, the substituted opening so many modern Christians experience is more fitting for a "science" documentary filmed by the likes of Ken Hamm.: “The earth is only 6,000 years old because the 6 days of creation must be read as literal days. Genesis 1 and following genealogies explain the timeline for the age of the earth.”

And it should have raised our suspicions early on because it is not at all the way you would expect an epic to begin. 

DAD FOR A DAY

I really only accomplished one thing today - being a Dad to each of my four kids. Two in person and two from a distance. 

Samuel was passing through Columbus on his way to Georgia for the weekend - I took him out for coffee and conversation and then fed him lunch.

Caleb called for advice on getting himself, his car, and his stuff moved to El Paso next week - I helped him think through his options.

Hannah's birthday was today and I ventured into the online world of DoorDash for the first time in order to get some donuts to her and her coworkers at the architecture firm outside of Chicago where she is interning. Made everyone happy.

And Sarah was in her high school's production of Wizard of Oz - and I attended opening night with Melissa, Grandma Trudy, and Sarah's friend Ellie. (Much better than the movie.)

It was a good day.  

I only got pictures of tonight, though. Sarah is in the blue dress and right next to Dorothy:

10 YEARS AGO: THE RESTAURANT

Ten years ago I ventured into Cap Haitien, Haiti to take my 3 "Haitian sons" out to eat.

Here we are on the Boulevard along the waterfront before dinner: Me, Mikken, Johnny, and Ruysdael.

The occasion was Johnny's birthday. 

I took the guys to Lakay, a sit down restaurant I had visited a couple of times with other missionaries. 

It was about 9 months into my first year in Haiti and I still had a lot to learn about cultural differences and about extreme poverty. 

After we had our fill of creole chicken and rice and beans, I asked the guys about their previous experience with eating out. 

"So how often do you guys get to go out to a restaurant like this? Once a month? Less?"

One of them spoke up: "Once". 

"Once? Do you mean once a month?"

"No. Once... Tonight."

And this was back when Haiti was relatively stable. And when Haitians knew a life which, if not prosperous, was at least peaceful. 

Ten long years ago.

JUDGED MORE STRICTLY

As a lifelong churchgoer and a former youth pastor, I've watched and worked with quite a few pastors in my lifetime.

At this stage of my life, I find that I don't often feel judgmental toward unbelievers who "know not what they do" or believers who fall short of the Author and Perfecter of our Faith.

If I get to feeling judgmental these days, it is usually directed at fellow pastors, men and women who are acting in ways that reflect badly on our Lord. Or who reinforce the world's negative stereotypes of believers. 

I've known a few truly godly pastors in my lifetime and I've known a few truly evil pastors. It seems the vast majority I have rubbed shoulders with have been rather mediocre. Lifeless sermons, stagnant or shrinking congregations, working for a paycheck, etc.

I hope I am not among the mediocre, but how do any of us judge ourselves accurately, right?

The thought scares me a bit because I don't think a pastor would have to be outright evil to earn God's disapproval. When you lead other believers and preach God's word and represent the Church to the world outside - mediocre may be bad enough.

"Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." James 3:1

THE ONLY OTHER CHOICE

I grew up in the United Methodist Church. 

As a denomination, the UMC has long recognized the validity of women as pastors. What I learned when I graduated from seminary in the late 90s, was that not every person in the pew or in leadership was on board with the official stance.

When I finished at Asbury, I got a call from my District Superintendent to ask my interest in filling a half-time position at a little congregation not far from my hometown of Shelbyville. I was very interested. 

This man picked me up in his car and together we drove 20 minutes into the countryside.

There was no small talk. It was all business. This man was a little creepy, having the physical appearance of a live-action version of Mr. Burns from The Simpsons. 

He explained that we would be meeting with the church's Pastor Parrish Relations Committee to discuss my possible employment. 

"I think they will be excited to have a young pastor like you, so I don't anticipate any problems. But technically, they DO have the power to reject you."

Then he glanced at me and said in a tone which implied the confidentiality of sharing in a secret plot, "If they say they don't want you, though, I will tell them that their only other choice is a WOMAN."

He was dead serious. 

(There was no woman. Fortunately, the church never called his bluff - they did want me.)

LOOKING UP

The moon passed in front of the sun today - at least from our perspective here in Columbus, Indiana. 

I turn 56 this week and in my lifetime I had never experienced a solar eclipse in "totality" until today.

It was an interesting couple of hours for Melissa and me as we sat in the backyard watching the moon slowly get in and then out of the way of the sun's normal business. 

Our retinas remain intact - we used our official solar eclipse glasses throughout, except for the 3 minutes and 46 seconds of totality.

It certainly made for a more interesting than normal Monday afternoon. And I guess I might even use the word "fascinating" to describe the experience, but it did not leave me wanting to make travel plans to wherever in the world the next path of totality will fall. 

I will be curious to hear what other people made of it all. If nothing else, it was nice to have something bigger than ourselves that pulled people out of their houses and offices and brought us all together for a short time.

And had us all looking up.

THE CUP ARGUMENT FOR PSA DOESN'T HOLD WATER

I have written elsewhere that I have never seen convincing Scriptural proof for the Penal Substitutionary Atonement theory's assertion that on the cross God poured out his righteous wrath on His Son so that God might remain just (by punishing sin appropriately) but also loving (by offering us forgiveness). 

A respected friend from across the aisle recently wrote, however, that he finds scriptural support for PSA in Jesus' reference to His impending death as a "cup" from God's hand in light of what a "cup" symbolized in the Old Testament. 

Many passages, the argument goes, use the cup as a metaphor for God's wrath. 

For example Psalm 75:8 -

In the hand of the Lord is a cup
full of foaming wine mixed with spices;
he pours it out, and all the wicked of the earth
drink it down to its very dregs.

On the surface, this looks like a convincing argument: The Lord does often hand out a steaming cup of wrath in the Old Testament. 

But there are problems.

1) Even if the majority of the Old Testament references to cups are negative, not ALL are. Most famously, King David wrote "my cup runneth over". Was it overflowing with God's wrath? Psalm 116 references the "cup of salvation". 

This illustrates a wider problem, then.

2) A cup is simply a vessel. It can hold something terrible, like wrath, or it can hold something refreshing, like blessings. The cup holds whatever God is handing to you. 

IF Jesus had said, "Father, if possible, take this cup OF YOUR WRATH from me", I would feel differently about this argument for PSA. But he never says what the cup is full of. Could it not be simply a cup of suffering?

But having said all that, one need look no further than the Gospel of Mark to see the cup argument for PSA fall apart completely. 

Remarkably, I saw a proponent of PSA writing for Ligonier Ministries cite Mark 10 as evidence of the cup Jesus drank being God's wrath. He quoted verses 35 to 38:

35 And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came up to him and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.” 36 And he said to them, “What do you want me to do for you?” 37 And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” 38 Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 

Obviously, the implied answer to Jesus' question is "No" - it is His alone to drink the "cup of God's wrath". The author concludes that "cup" here necessarily "represents the cup of divine wrath that Jesus would drink on behalf of His people to save them from their sin." But notice the words "of divine wrath" do not appear in this passage. 

To his credit, the writer does acknowledge that the conversation did not end there. He mentions, but does not quote, verses 39 to 40:

39 And they said to him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized, 40 but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”

Somehow, in the writer's mind, we are no longer talking about the cup of God's wrath. Instead, "Jesus was pointing to the fact that in a sense, they would share in the ordeal Christ was about to undergo in Jerusalem", i.e. they would suffer.

I agree with his conclusion - Jesus is saying the disciples will have a similar cup from God's hand, a cup of suffering. 

I am just not sure why Jesus' cup is assumed to be God's wrath in verse 38. If that is the proper reading of the first part of the passage, don't we have to be consistent and maintain that Jesus told His disciples in the second half that they would also drink the cup of God's wrath?

FIRST DAYS AND LAST DAYS GO TOGETHER

I've been poking around in Hebrews lately. It's a fascinating book. I have never taken a deep dive into Hebrews, but I am feeling motivated to do so. 

I love how it starts:

In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. 

In this, Hebrews positions the New Testament happenings as the continuation and fulfillment of the Old Testament. 

N.T. Wright says, “We could perhaps look at Hebrews as a Christian introduction to the Old Testament. The letter points out that Israel’s scriptures were always looking ahead to something yet to come: a new covenant, a new type of priesthood, a new altar, a better sacrifice, a city to which the present Jerusalem would only be an advance signpost.” 

If we want to understand who God is and how He presents Reality, it behooves us as believers to get familiar with the great themes that are introduced in Genesis and then developed throughout the Old Testament.

Not only will this clarify for us what Scripture reveals about Life, Purpose, and Faith, it may also steel us against falling for more recently developed teachings which turn out to be distortions of the Truth. 

THE LOSS OF MYSTERY

I found this quote via Tim Ferris:

“I sometimes wonder whether conspiracy theories are an attempt to re-enchant the world in a distorted way. It’s like religion knocking on the door and trying to come back in a strange and distorted form. A sense of mystery beyond our own understanding of the world. If you ever talk to conspiracy theorists, that’s the sense you get from them.”  — Adam Curtis

I confess that I am not familiar with Adam Curtis. I don't know who he is but I think he may be onto something.

Across our culture in recent years I have sensed a growing sense of anxiety, cynicism and a bit of despair. 

And as the negativity rises, there seems to be a corresponding decline in awe and mystery. 

Is one side cause and the other effect? If I had to guess, I think we lost our sense of wonder first, and that precipitated a general malaise. If all the magic of being alive and aware of our surroundings disappears, we're left with nothing but the sadness and tragedies of this world. 

I don't know how the mystery was lost, but the Church must bear some blame. 

We were keepers of the miraculous and the supernatural. 

And now we mainly just gather together for an hour on Sunday mornings to sit and listen quietly. Is this what it looks like to be filled with the Holy Spirit?

It puts me in mind of a couple of other quotes; these from missionary Jim Elliot:

“We are so utterly ordinary, so commonplace, while we profess to know a Power the Twentieth Century does not reckon with.”

And

"Forgive me for being so ordinary while claiming to know so extraordinary a God.

PERFECT

"Perfect" is one of those biblical words that deserves to be wrestled with. 

What does it mean that Jesus called us to "be perfect"? (Matt 5:48)

I have always disliked the "Christian" bumper sticker slogan "I'm not perfect, just forgiven". 

It fits right in with the all too common perception that a trip to the altar when you were eleven years old somehow functions as eternal fire insurance. And it doesn't really matter how you live out the rest of your days - Jesus paid for all your sins on the cross, past, present, and future.

Just frame that altar trip behind some glass and hang it on the wall. You won't really need it until death comes calling.

There’s really nothing in the New Testament that could justify such a view. 

If Americans read their Bibles more, I think this would be pretty obvious. 

Hebrews 10:14 - For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

DISSERTATION MILESTONE

After five months of saying, "I've got to finish this", today I did it - I finished the prospectus for my dissertation.

If you're not familiar with the terminology, the prospectus is simply the proposal for the topic I want to study and my approach to the project overall. It was 13 pages plus 3 pages of bibliography. 

It will need to be accepted by my academic advisor and I hear first drafts rarely are, so I anticipate needing to make some revisions before my project is formerly approved. The question is how extensive those revisions will be.

(I have no Plan B if the whole idea gets shot down, so I am praying my prospectus is well-received.)

Although this milestone represents several months of blowing past self-imposed deadlines, I feel encouraged because I have reached the starting line and I am excited about the work to come. That fact alone is worth celebrating. I don't know how I would be able to complete my degree work this next year if I didn't have enthusiasm for it.

As far as I can tell, this dissertation is the main reason the Lord opened this door of doctorate work through Wesley Biblical Seminary three years ago. 

I am eager now to walk through it and I am curious as to what waits on the other side.

CONVERSING WITH EMOTION

Charles Duhigg in Supercommunicators:

"Emotions impact every conversation, whether we realize it or not. Even when we don't acknowledge those feelings, they're still there - and when they are ignored, they're likely to become obstacles to connection." (p.161)

Can Duhigg get an "Amen!"? 

We are emotional creatures, not rational, and we communicate in ways that are emotional, not rational.

How many relationships are strained or broken primarily because people cannot express emotions on one side nor recognize unspoken emotions on the other?

EASTER WEEKEND 2024

What an incredible weekend - combining all the special worship of Holy Week with having all four kids together under our roof again. I loved every minute. 

I got to share from Scripture 4 separate times: At our own Maundy Thursday service, at the community Good Friday service, and then twice at Sardinia on Easter morning. And in between, I tried to spend as much time as possible with the kids.

Caleb and Hannah both arrived home late Thursday and then Samuel got home by lunchtime on Friday, so we had a solid 48 hours plus with everyone.

We put those hours to good use - eating out, enjoying springtime weather at a local park, and hiding Easter eggs. 

We discovered that Sugar is absolutely CRAZY about retrieving a frisbee.

It is so gratifying to see how much our kids love each other - even if that love is punctuated by squabbles and pestering each other at times. 

Easter breakfast at Sardinia Baptist was fantastic.

The kids helped their mom with the Easter egg hunt. Although some eggs were placed a bit out of reach for the gradeschoolers. 

They got to hide more eggs at Grandma Trudy's house later in the day - after the rain showers cleared away. 

And my kids always get a kick out of their cousins' kids. They get cuter and more fun as they get older. 

They enjoyed some alone time with Grandma after the little ones cleared out. And while I took a nap!

By evening, Samuel was headed back to school. Hannah and Caleb left after lunch today. Things are - sadly - back to normal tonight.

Yes, Melissa and I are very aware of how blessed we are!