Division - the punch. 1 Corinthians 1.

(There's a lot of setup to get to what was, for me, the punchline in today's reading. If you just want to read the punchline, skip here.)

"I urge you, brothers and sisters, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to agree together, to end your divisions, and to be united by the same mind and purpose." (1 Corinthians 1:10)

With these words, Paul launches into a lengthy call for unity in the church at Corinth, as the first of several issues and problems he addresses in this letter. The division he's addressing seems to be rooted in a very Greek practice -- the art of rhetoric, the ability to speak and write to persuade. Rhetoric and its cousin, politics, were one of the main areas of study for most of the history of western culture, from Greece onward. Paul employs the techniques of rhetoric in his letters, including this one. By which we understand that there's nothing inherently wrong with rhetoric itself. But even in Greece, the art of rhetoric came under scrutiny and criticism when it degenerated strictly into the art of persuasion and ostentation, divorced from truth.

In the latter half of this first chapter, and on into the second, Paul exposes the division in Corinth as coming from a sense of "who's the smartest kid on the block?" Enamored of human wisdom, reasoning, argumentation, and who made the most persuasive arguments, the Corinthian church had aligned themselves as followers of various teachers. And so we have Paul writing as a follow-up to his statement urging unity: Now I mean this, that each of you is saying, “I am with Paul,” or “I am with Apollos,” or “I am with Cephas,” or “I am with Christ.” Is Christ divided? Paul wasn’t crucified for you, was he? Or were you in fact baptized in the name of Paul? (v.1:12)

(Note: Some commentators think that Paul used the names he did, not because people were aligning under each of these leader/teachers, but as a way to describe the problem without naming the actual leaders causing the division.)

I can really relate to the idea of argumentation as a means of determining who's the smartest kid on the block. I used to think that it had to be me. And I'd argue to show it. And even when I say that using the past tense, I can't say I'm fully past that tendency. I still love to argue, especially in the sense of testing theses against other theses, when looking at God's Word and seeking to understand it better. Getting older has helped me understand that I'm not the smartest kid on the block, if for no other reason than I'm no longer a kid on the block. And so Paul's words at the end of this chapter, a quote from Jeremiah, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord," are like a good punch in the stomach.

Again, Paul doesn't say don't apply your mind in the exercise of your faith, and he doesn't shy away from the use of rhetorical techniques. But he cautions against the substitution of rhetorical tricks for genuine wisdom. He argues against valuing those who demonstrate rhetorical genius, or human wisdom, at the expense of God's wisdom, a wisdom demonstrated in the most unreasonable act imaginable - Christ's death on the cross. Because the Corinthians were placing value in the argumentation skills of different teachers, instead of the message they brought, there was division in the church. And Christ's church isn't supposed to about division, but about multiplication.

The punchline.
There's something very important in what Paul says in this chapter for the church today, and for our behavior toward one another. It hit me today as I read verse 12, quoted above. The shortcut quotation of verse 12, usually includes only Paul and Apollos, occasionally Peter. People talking about division in the church today might say something like, 'Remember how it was wrong that the Corinthians aligned themselves under Paul and Apollos.'

But Paul includes some who say, "I am with Christ." Whoa. Division in the church caused by those who say, "I am with Christ." He's not talking about the inevitable division between those who believe and those who don't that Jesus talked about in Luke 12, when He said He came to bring division, not peace. Paul's talking about division in the family of Christ.

And I recognize that. There are those who wield their Christianity, their knowledge, yes, even their prejudices, like a club, pounding the least deviation from what they consider the orthodox view, the view they hold. And pounding the people. I see that in those who hold to the King James translation as the only one correct translation. (And while I respect some of the thinking behind that viewpoint, and would never want to break fellowship with anyone over the issue, the precise point is that some are radical enough to think they should break fellowship with those who don't agree.) The same holds for many theological viewpoints that are held with such rigidity in areas that are both non-essential, and inconclusive from the Bible.

I recognize that attitude. "Well, I follow Christ." Implying the ones they disagree with don't. The most direct corollary to what Paul was talking about in Corinth are the people who attack various Christian leaders from Billy Graham to Chuck Smith (founder of Calvary Chapel) to Rick Warren, often with great venom. This is not to say that there are no false teachers, or false doctrines out there. There are all too many. But for all of them, there are thousands of sincere, upright women and men of God, serving Him, and doing so without 100% agreement amongst themselves on every issue of doctrine. And we're all capable of goofing up from time to time, in our understanding of Scripture, in our handling of relationship, in misplaced priorities, and in poor choices. Love and grace should be the defining characteristics of our relationship with brothers and sisters in Christ, and humility in our own estimation of what we know.

The correct answer, as Paul says, is that we are baptized in Christ, not Paul. We're not followers of Billy Graham, nor should we be detractors of Billy Graham. So... "I follow Christ," is the right answer, but only when that's what we really mean -- with no further divisive implications.

So act with care. As Paul said, "I urge you, brothers and sisters, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to agree together, to end your divisions, and to be united by the same mind and purpose."

Cleopas and the other guy. Luke 24.

In his letter to Timothy, Paul writes, "Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the person dedicated to God may be capable and equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16,17 NET) And while this is true, and we should strive to learn from every part of God's Word, inevitably there are certain passages that we are drawn to more than others. They become favorites. It's also true that there are passages which apply more directly to our current life situations. We may need to cling to a promise or obey a command that is especially relevant to that situation. That too is another way we become attached to certain passages of Scripture.

Luke 24:13-35 is a passage that I'm drawn to -- a real favorite. Even as I write these words, I realize that I need to restrain myself from writing too much because I could be here all day, essentially composing a sermon. This is the story of two disciples, who on the Sunday of Jesus' resurrection, after hearing the report of the women who visited the tomb, take a stroll to the village of Emmaus, about 7.5 miles west of Jerusalem. The very first thing that pops into my head is why? There are lots of possibilities, one of which might have to do with Emmaus itself. No one is really quite sure of its exact location. Some speculate that the word Emmaus is derived from the Hebrew word, yem or yemim, which might mean hot springs. Wouldn't that be something, if the guys were headed out of town to take in a hot bath? From the text, and from their actions, however, it's most likely that they were returning home.

One of the disciples is named, Cleopas, the other remains unnamed -- the other guy. Why? Usually this means the named one, Cleopas, would be known to the recipients of the writing, but not the other guy. But we don't know anything else about Cleopas from the New Testament. (There is some speculation that Clopas, named in John 19 is the same person, but even that tells us nothing much about this disciple.)

Well, look at how quickly this story can grow. Two paragraphs and I've hardly begun. Like I said, I love this story, and have lots that I could say about it. Here's the heart of my response today, contained in three thoughts.

1. Jesus is central to all of God's Word, Old Testament and New Testament. In verse 27, Luke writes, "Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things written about himself in all the scriptures." As I read those words, I want to be walking with them, hearing Jesus go through the text. Where am I not seeing Him? And while I can't be on that road, I can count on His Spirit's presence to help illuminate the text. This is a spur, a prod, an encouragement for me to be in His Word, to study, to uncover, to have uncovered for me, the same revelation these two brothers received.
2. In the breaking of bread, the disciples recognized Jesus. That should be true of us as well. I see this in two ways. The first is a natural communion thought: when we celebrate communion, the Lord's Supper, we are faced with the very presence of Jesus if we will allow that to happen. He said, "remember me, when you do this." He said in the bread and the wine we see Him, on the cross. And the question is, do we? Are we taking the time to truly remember? The second way this is true, isn't tied to our ceremonial bread breaking, but to our every day, and especially communal breaking of bread. Jesus said to daily pray for the bread we need. In this, we remember that all that we have is a gift from God. We should be reminded of Jesus, recognize His hand at work in our life, with every breaking of bread. And in the community of sisters and brothers, the breaking of bread is not only a celebration of God's daily provision, but a celebration of His family -- provision, shared experience, insight, delight, travail, resemblance. We had a barbecue a couple of weeks ago. For those who came, as you ate together in fellowship with one another, did you recognize the work of Jesus? Did you know Him in our midst? Did you see Him in the faces and lives of those around you? Did you hear His laughter in the joy of being together? If this isn't yet the case, it only takes some forethought to begin to allow that to happen. He was there. He will be there. Go back to this passage in Luke, and think about how it was the familiar way the Master broke the bread that opened the eyes of these two disciples.
3. The disciples immediately went to share their experience with Jesus with others. They'd shared the evening meal with Jesus, the day almost done. But when they finally understood who had taught them on the road, who had caused their hearts to burn, ".... they got up that very hour and returned to Jerusalem." No matter the lateness of the hour, the darkness or length of the journey. It was Jesus Who had been in their midst. Hooray, we have to tell everyone.

I've hardly touched the surface of the ways this text speaks to me, like the way the two disciples were attracted to Jesus without knowing quite why and how they urged Him to stay with them. But these are big enough thoughts for today: seeing Jesus in the text and in the breaking of bread, and sharing that recognition with others.

There they are on the road to Emmaus. Cleopas and the other guy. The question is, am I the other guy? Are you the other gal or the other guy?

Make it right. Luke 23.

How much are we able to take in of the events of Luke 23?

I see, for example, the weak case of Jesus' accusers, even lying about what He taught about taxes. 'Father, step in and make this right.'

I see a corrupt ruler of the Jews meeting the true king, and treating Him like a cruel plaything -- do some tricks, Jesus. 'Father, step in and make this right.'

I see a cruel ruler of Rome trying to do the right thing, giving in and doing the easy thing. How often do the easy thing and the cruel thing coincide? 'Father, step in and make this right.'

I see the debased attitudes and actions, that we are all capable as sinful creatures, of the guards and soldiers. Petty, mean, and mocking that say more about the guards than the criminals. 'Father, step in and make this right.'

I see the mob, blind to what it does, easily manipulated by those with the agenda. 'Father, step in and make this right.'

I see gut-wrenching irony in the mocking, "He saved others, let Him save Himself." 'You fools, can't you see He's still saving others!? Father, please step in and make this right.'

I see the challenge of Jesus, even here,which separates those who believe, from those who don't. Criminal from criminal. Gambling soldiers from observant centurion. 'Father, step in and make this right.'

'Father, step in and make this right. I'm not worthy of this sacrifice. No one is. Only your Son is, and yet He's the one making the sacrifice. How is it that you can love so deeply? I am an unclean man with unclean lips of a people with unclean lips.'

Even in all this darkness, in all this horror, I see moments of light. Someone to ease the burden for a moment, carrying the cross. (As we are called to do.) The women. Witnesses to it all. Right there. Paradise for one of the criminals. Revelation to the centurion. The request for forgiveness for all from the One providing forgiveness for all who believe. Honor in the manner of burial.

I can't take it all in. But in the evening, I will try, as they must have done. "On the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment."

'Father, step in and make me right.'

Maundy Thursday. Luke 22.

Through an interesting coincidence of calendar, our read through Luke is more or less corresponding to the days referred to in the traditional church calendar as "Holy Week." As affiliates of a Restoration Movement church, the liturgical calendar is not nearly as influential as it is within the Catholic, Orthodox, and certain Protestant denominational churches. But we don't escape tradition altogether, especially since certain events of Jesus' final week on earth correspond to particular days of the week. So, we may celebrate a Good Friday service just ahead of Easter Sunday.

If this were Easter week, today would be Holy Thursday, known as Maundy Thursday in England and many English-speaking countries. As mentioned in the Wikipedia entry, four events are celebrated on this day: the washing of the disciples' feet by Jesus (found in John), the institution of the Last Supper, Jesus' agony praying in the garden of Gethsemane, and the betrayal of Jesus by Judas.

Now when the hour came, Jesus took his place at the table and the apostles joined him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” (Luke 22:14-16 NET)

The Greek words translated here as "earnestly desired" are actually the same Greek word written twice, first as a noun, and then a verb. In other words - with great desire I desired. Isn't this a tremendous thought. This meal will, in essence, cost Him his life, and yet He has passionately looked forward to it. It is at this meal, that the old covenant is now fully transformed by the new covenant. The passover meal, celebrating the time when death passed over the people of Israel, is replaced by the Lord's supper, celebrating for all time, that death passes over the people of Christ, through His death the very next day. This is the penultimate moment of Jesus' ministry on earth, a bittersweet moment with His closest companions.

I like the name "maundy." It's from the Latin word, mandatum, that means commandment, as in "I give you a new commandment." But it has a melancholy kind of sound, maybe like maudlin, but not so overdone. But it is the day of new command; an inclusive command that joins us to God's chosen people. It is the day of incredible betrayal and overwhelming agony -- the moment when Jesus is crushed in spirit like an olive in the press (gath shemen).

On this day, we remember when death passed us over.

Contradictory words. Luke 21

Another late night rendezvous at the blog. And no, I'm not going to write about the desolation of Jerusalem and the coming of the Son of Man. And yes, those words present some difficulties in resolving seeming contradictions about timing in them. Instead, I want to briefly look at some words of Jesus, given in the middle of His discussion of the End of the Age.

You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers, relatives, and friends, and they will have some of you put to death. You will be hated by everyone because of my name. Yet not a hair of your head will perish. By your endurance you will gain your lives. (Luke 21:16-19 NET)

What really caught my attention was that within one sentence of each other, Jesus says that some of His disciples will be betrayed and put to death, and then says not a hair of their heads will perish. What? Will die, won't be harmed? While these words are seemingly contradictory, the fact that they're so close to each other pretty much guarantees that they aren't. And I think that's really important.

I'll get back to the statements in a minute, but first let me talk for a minute about the "gotcha" mentality with which some skeptics approach the Bible. These folks look for statements that they claim do contradict each other, and then cry "gotcha" and put them down as a reason not to believe in the Bible or in Jesus. In doing this, they ignore the remarkable consistency in this book written by about 40 authors over period of 1500 years. If these two statements of Jesus were spoken on separate occasions, they might be one more in a list of gotchas.

But these statements come almost in the same breath. Our task, then, becomes one of figuring out exactly what Jesus meant. This is always our task, and the tools and methods we use to help us cross the distances of time, language, and culture, are the same whether we we're reading the amazing (and consistent) truths we call the Beatitudes in Matthew 5, or the paragraph-long sentences of Paul. As we do so, resolving this apparent contradiction can be both the push that gets us to examine Jesus' saying more carefully, and the natural result of careful examination. This is true, whether the statements have to be consistent on the basis of common human behavior, or on the basis of our trust in God's inspiration.

In the former case, our thought process goes something like this. No reasonable, normal human being, especially a teacher, makes such completely contradictory statements in the course of such an immediate time span. Either we're not understanding what's being said, we're not grasping some underlying consistent thought, or, perhaps, we're missing some point being emphasized in figurative language.

In the latter case, our thinking might go like this. Over time, reasonable, normal human beings say things that contradict other things they have said in the past. Sometimes that's because they've changed, sometimes it has to do with inconsistencies in their own beliefs and understandings, and sometimes the circumstances are different, and the statements may or may not be inconsistent. Add to that mix the possibility that we're not understanding what's being said, we're not grasping some underlying consistent thought, or, we're missing some point being emphasized in figurative language. How then, do we decide which of these possibilities is true? We begin with this underlying thought -- God-breathed words will be consistent.

Let's move on to the words at hand. The first thing I notice is that the language, "not a hair of your head will perish" is clearly figurative. In fact without seeing this phrase as figurative, we might say that all Jesus meant was that some of His disciples would be put to death, but no harm would come to their hair when that happened. Digging deeper, this figurative language means something like "you'll be so protected, no part of you will come to harm." But it can't mean just, or only, physical harm because then we have the contradiction with the earlier statement. This leads to this observation: the key to what Jesus meant is to understand what he meant by perish. Looking more closely, I notice that Jesus uses two different words, at least in the English translation -- "put to death" versus "perish." Checking the Greek, it turns out that these are two different words: thanatoo and apollumi. Now Jesus spoke in Aramaic, but we assume that the Greek is a faithful rendering of what He said, and so here's a second observation: these statements of Jesus are not the exact opposites of one another. A corollary might be that perish doesn't mean death. The second thing I learn from the Greek words is that the word translated as "perish," also means "lost." It's the same word that is used in the three parables about lost things in chapter 15. Now that's interesting. Consulting several translations, I see that in this verse the Greek word is usually translated as perish, but it certainly makes more sense to see it as lost. Hair doesn't typically perish, but it can be lost -- just ask me. (That was a joke, son.) But we can make this third observation: the phrase, "not a hair of your head may perish," may be tied to the lessons Jesus gave earlier. Finally, by looking at verse 19 at the end of the quoted passage, I see that not only will no part of a disciple be lost, but through endurance, life (or soul) will be gained.

Putting this all together, I think it's pretty clear that Jesus has in mind our ultimate destiny, when it comes to this passage. In fact, He's contrasting that destiny with what may happen physically to the disciples. In a big, broad paraphrase, I would put it this way. 'Life is going to be hard for you. The more you live for Me, the more people will come after you -- even your relatives. Some of you will be put to death because of Me. But hang in there. Don't let your circumstances discourage you from hanging in there. I'll give you the words to respond to your accusers. I'll use these incidents as a witness to who I am. This won't be defeat. Even in the hardest circumstance you could possibly face, I'll use it to My glory. And the Father's. Hang in there. You won't be lost. Your ultimate destiny is with Me in the Father's presence.'

Contradictory? No. Difficult? Yes. Encouraging? Absolutely.

Debate 101. Luke 20.

Here are some rules for debate based on what happens to those who oppose Jesus in Luke 20.

1. Choose your opponent carefully. (v.1-8).
2. Choose your venue carefully. (v.9-19, esp. v.19)
3. Choose your debate points carefully. (v.20-26)
4. Choose clever rhetorical tactics at your own risk. (v.27-38)
   
5. Choose a graceful exit, when beaten. (v.20:39-40
6. Choose silence when overwhelmed by the force of your opponent's argument. (v.41-44)

And the winner was...

Little Z. Luke 19.

Blog? What blog? Oh, this one...

I love the story of Zaccheus. As Luke tells it, almost every sentence is rich with lesson and meaning and implication. It's the last incident recorded by Luke before Jesus enters Jerusalem for the last time. Take a look at this map, and you'll see why Jesus needed to stay with Zaccheus in Jericho.

Let's put the entire passage on our virtual paper.

Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through it. Now a man named Zacchaeus was there; he was a chief tax collector and was rich. He was trying to get a look at Jesus, but being a short man he could not see over the crowd. So he ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see him, because Jesus was going to pass that way. And when Jesus came to that place, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down quickly, because I must stay at your house today.” So he came down quickly and welcomed Jesus joyfully. And when the people saw it, they all complained, “He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner.” But Zacchaeus stopped and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord, half of my possessions I now give to the poor, and if I have cheated anyone of anything, I am paying back four times as much!” Then Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this household, because he too is a son of Abraham! For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” (Luke 19:1-10 NET)

The good stuff.
"He was a chief tax collector and was rich." Could Zaccheus' position in life be stated more clearly, especially in such an understated way? Six times already in Luke, the tax collectors are identified, with disdain or revulsion, the equivalent of "sinner." And in the last chapter, Jesus makes a point about the worthlessness of self-declared righteousness, by making a tax collector the good guy in contrast with a Pharisee. Little Z is a chief tax collector, which likely means he had some regional authority over other tax collectors. Take a look at the map, and note that the road to Jerusalem from Galilee ran through Jericho. Travelers paid taxes as they entered new regions. He was rich.

"... being a short man he could not see over the crowd." Oooh. A man with a power over them that most despised, and rich, too. So he was not honored with a position in the front of the crowd where he could see. He was an outsider.

"... ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree ..." Maybe I went out on a limb with that last characterization, but this behavior would seem to indicate that Little Z knew how to take care of himself, without relying on the kindness or honor of the people around him. It does demonstrate a real tenaciousness to accomplish what he wants to accomplish, and something of the draw of the Rabbi.

“'Zacchaeus, come down quickly, because I must stay at your house today.' So he came down quickly ...” The imperative in Jesus statement -- the immediate response -- the repeated phrase. Just like Levi, a tax collector: “'Follow me,' he said to him. And he got up and followed him, leaving everything behind.” What part of walking in faith don't we understand?

“... and welcomed Jesus joyfully.” Again, this is so simply and eloquently stated.

“Today salvation has come to this household...” In the person of Jesus. Or better said, by receiving the person of Jesus, and turning away from the sins of his (Little Z's) past.

“'For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.'” And so it is that the parables of chapter 15 are given flesh and bones in the life and example of Zaccheus.

The literary stuff.
In addition to the phrasing and simplicity of Luke's telling of this story, there's also the matter of the terrific juxtaposition of this story of a rich man to the story in the previous chapter of a rich man, both of which follow the parable of the prayers where the good guy is the tax collector. Take some time to compare the two stories, and see how they inform each other.

The hard stuff.
It's possible that Jesus' saying about Little Z's salvation as a son of Abraham was hard for the people to understand. Perhaps it's hard for us to understand, also, coming as it does right after Zaccheus' pledge of a good work. For the people of Jesus' day the tax collectors were the scavengers of their society -- earning their livelihood by colluding with the Romans and the Herodians, and abusing their authority to collect taxes by adding an extra cut for themselves. (I know many if not most if not all of you readers already know this, but it bears repeating.) This brought them very close to being outcasts not only in their relations with their fellow Jews, but even to be considered Jews. A second fact for the people was that deliverance or salvation was available to all who were children of Abraham, simply by birthright. Hence, their problem with Jesus' pronouncement.

What about us? Was it Little Z's works that earned salvation? And what does Jesus' equating salvation with being a son of Abraham mean? This is my understanding. God's covenant with Abraham was, in essence, this: He would be God to Abraham. This included protection, blessing, and through Abraham's descendants, blessing to all the people. Jesus' coming is the completion (partial) of God's commitment within that covenant. To be a child of Abraham is to be a part of God's kingdom -- He is God to the citizens of the kingdom. Entering God's kingdom is, in fact, synonymous with salvation. I would say that the invitation to enter the kingdom was Jesus' primary way of saying this is how you are delivered from the consequences of your sin. Turn away from your old ways, which are in essence, living in your own kingdom, and enter the Father's kingdom. In Zaccheus' announcement of what he would do in response to Jesus' call to "come down", Little Z simply demonstrated that he had stepped into the kingdom.

Why Little Z?
I was thinking about the different ways the story of Zaccheus is presented, and I know there's a children's song about him, but not having grown up in Sunday School, I don't actually remember the words. I think I've seen his story "rapped" before -- the Little Z rap. And these are kind of sweet re-tellings of the story. And this makes sense, certainly to children who understand what it means to be small and unable to see what's going on. But this is also a deadly serious story. Little Z is not just about a small man who climbed a tree to see. It's about the dramatic transformation of a despised man, who had a scummy profession, who answered the call of the One Who calls us all to come away from our unholy lives. Little Z is the fundamental story of redemption, and we don't want to miss that because we've removed the reality of who he was in exchange for the picturesque manner of his redemption. And so, Little Z is my way of poking fun at myself so I will remember that his story is also my story. Me, Little Hook.

Persistent prayer. Luke 18.

Then Jesus told them a parable to show them they should always pray and not lose heart. (Luke 18:1 NET)

I didn't need to go any further than the first verse this morning, before I knew what it was God really wanted me to pay attention to today. I really don't even need the parable. I just need to trust His words -- always pray and not lose heart.

Like many of Jesus' words, there are times in our life when it's easy to hear them, and not really be impacted by them. Of course we're supposed to always to pray. And if our life has been blessed most of the time, maybe we've not really had to pray for a long time, waiting for an answer. And I mean a long time. Take the Jewish people, for example. When John the Baptist arrived on the scene, they had been waiting for more than 400 years for their deliverer, the Messiah. That's generations of praying. (Imagine hearing the admonition to pray always from the lips of the Deliverer Himself. Or imagine Simeon's delight when Jesus is brought to the temple.)

But nearly everyone faces at least one long-standing prayer request that seemingly will never be answered. Earlier Jesus taught His disciples how to pray -- honoring the Father, seeking His will, remembering our dependence on Him for everything, then asking for what we need including forgiveness, which we are to ask for with a forgiving spirit. Now He teaches us how often to pray -- all the time. His teaching lets us know that we shouldn't expect an immediate answer, so we're not to get discouraged over God's silence in the interim. And in that "long" time, the key is not to lose heart. In that long time, the sincerity of our faith is measured by the persistence in our prayer. (And Jesus also taught that this faith need only be as great a mustard seed to be effective.)

But in the midst of that long time, the reality of these teachings has an impact that isn't there when we're not in the midst of the long time. The woman in the parable eventually has her case heard by the judge. But until then, the need to persist in requesting that her case be heard is paramount. What if the judge had delayed for 1 year longer? Five years? Ten years? Depending on the need, depending on her hope, she might have reached a day when she lost hope, and gave up. Have you been there? Has God required that much persistence in your prayer? A time when you reached the outer edge of hope? It is at that moment that these words of Jesus can help. Or not. Some will receive them in despair. Some will receive them in renewal. But they're no longer just words Jesus spoke. They are reality.

I'm not sure I've really expressed what is on my heart. Let me try this. Suppose you have a friend who has been out of work for an extended time. Bills are piling up, doors continue to close, and life is generally very difficult. You care for this friend, and pray for them on a regular basis. You help out as you can, even sharing from your surplus. But everything continues to go downhill for your friend. Maybe they fall and sprain a wrist, and are unable to work at what they can do. Or their child gets sick. I think you have the picture. So one day, you are talking with them and you bring up this story Jesus told. How do you think they'll react? Depending on how you bring it up, there are several possibilities: anger, because it's easy for you to talk about not giving up hope; tears, because it's difficult to keep up hope in the face of the continued difficulties; bitterness, that God continues to remain silent; gratitude, for reminding them of this promise.

Depending on what you've experienced in life, and your own level of empathy, you, too, may be shocked by a negative response. How is it possible for these words of Jesus not to help? The question becomes, are they platitude for you, or living water? Have you drunk deeply of their truth in a dry, barren place, or only sipped them after a workout in the gym? There's no accusation in what I'm saying, but a recognition that until we're called upon to rely wholeheartedly on Jesus' promise in Luke 18:1, we may not fully comprehend what it means to do so. And while there's no accusation, there is a word of caution. Usually, hurting people need our sympathy, not our advice. And quoting this verse may come off as unwelcome advice. See the book of Job if this is at all unclear.

I needed this reminder today. As we continue in our long time, we're grateful for all the blessings that He has given us, including those delivered by your hands, and other friends' hands. Praise God that we not only have Jesus as friend and brother, but that we have this lesson preserved for us to receive today.

There's a bunch more in this chapter, and once again I encourage anyone who would like to, to add a comment on what they read in Luke 18.

More on attitude. Luke 17.

Updated*. I'm going to skip the latter half of this chapter, and the temptation to write about the coming of the Son of Man, and dwell on the first part of the chapter, where Jesus continues to talk about the attitudes of a disciple. In chapter 16, Jesus taught about our attitude towards money, and the use of our talents and assets. There are four attitudes in Luke 17:1-19 that further characterize a disciple of Christ. (The makings of another great sermon here.) Without any decoration, here they are.

1. Don't be a stumbling block for others, leading them astray. (v.1-2)
2. Have the right attitude about fellow Christians' sins, rebuking when necessary, forgiving as asked. (v.3-4).
3. Increase your faith by remembering Jesus' promise of its power. (This is a self-reinforcing concept, by faith your faith is increased.) (v.5-6)
4. Don't expect special praise when you do what was commanded. (v.7-10)
5. Express your gratitude for what God has done in your life -- the cleansing by Jesus. (v.11-18).

Your turn. Provide the decoration for these statements -- further explanation, examples, and application in your life.

*Update. Couldn't resist one bit of decoration. The leper who demonstrates the proper attitude of gratitude, is a Samaritan. Contrary to the label of another parable, Samaritans weren't the good guys. That's the ironical point -- they were despised.

The puzzle in the middle. Luke 16.

If yesterday's passages are some of the most familiar in all of the New Testament, today's are some of the most tricky we face. While the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is well known, the parable of the shrewd steward is a real puzzler. Jesus even explains most of that parable in verses 8-13, and yet that commending the shrewd guy... ? In between is this curious set of teachings:

The Pharisees (who loved money) heard all this and ridiculed him. But Jesus said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in men’s eyes, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly prized among men is utterly detestable in God’s sight.

“The law and the prophets were in force until John; since then, the good news of the kingdom of God has been proclaimed, and everyone is urged to enter it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tiny stroke of a letter in the law to become void.

“Everyone who divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery, and the one who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.” (Luke 16:14-18 NET)

It's not so much that these are indecipherable individually (although that bit about law might cause some difficulty), as it is that collectively these seem like outliers for the rest of the context. That is, what do they have to do with each other, and what do they have to do with the teachings on money on either side of them? One of our principles in understanding Luke is to remember that he felt free to combine and recombine teachings of Jesus into an "orderly account", and that some of the time he appears to have done so to enhance the message of Jesus. A second principle is to recognize that the formation of Luke's gospel, like the rest of Scripture, is God-breathed, so that Luke is acting on God's behalf if does rearrange the material. We could add a third principle, which is, Luke may simply be recording what Jesus taught on this occasion, repeating teachings of His that we read in other contexts in the other gospels, in which case it's Jesus' decision to group these teachings together.

Practically, there is no difference in whether Jesus grouped these sayings together or Luke did. For us, the question is, 'How do they hang together? What is the full message of these teachings that we might not otherwise understand individually? How are they connected?'

Personally, I puzzled over this all day. A post that began on Wednesday morning, I'm only just now completing on Thursday morning. In the end, do I have a clue? Well, maybe just a clue. Or a way to search for clues. What I hope will be instructive is to map out the process I used to try and understand these verses in context. Typically, this process is in four stages. First, I write down what I know about the passage -- more or less a summary of what's stated. Second, I look for general ideas in what I've written down, hoping to discover some organizing principle that I can use to complete stage three. This third stage is a high-level outline of the passage. The final stage is where I develop any conclusions based on the outline. Along the way, the other clues that can be discovered are found in things like repeated words or phrases, references to other Scripture, and connecting words.

Stage 1.
Verses 1-8a, the story of the shrewd manager. For disciples. Conclusion in 8b-9, which seems to be that worldly people do better in the world, that those in the light. But we're also to be shrewd in the world -- use our resources to make friends. But since these are friends in eternal homes, this must really mean God. Understanding parable will require more work, but conclusion should be sufficient for now -- we need to be smart about the use of our assets, putting them to work for eternal purposes. This is about MONEY, etc.

Verses 10-13. More about MONEY. Continuation of the previous lesson about handling what we've been given, well? Major counterpoint -- this is about the use of money, not the gathering of money, nor about the skill in doing so -- can't serve MONEY and God. This seems in contrast to the manager's handling of the boss' money. Hmmm? Clue to parable's full meaning? Ignore the specifics or ethics of the manager's actions, but concentrate on the fact that he was commended for shrewdness.

Verses 19-31. Story of the rich man and Lazarus. Point -- choose wisely while you have time. Prophetic statement at the end seems directed back at the Pharisees. Once blinded even the most spectacular events won't help in the seeing. That's grim. That's how it came out, too. Reinforces the idea of serving God, not worldly values. That fits Luke's description of the Pharisees in v.14. Look into the possibility that Pharisees practiced prosperity thinking -- this was an OT way of viewing life -- blessed in worldly things, you're righteous; poor in worldly things, you're not. See beatitudes.

Verses 14-18. Jesus addresses Pharisees who were ridiculing Jesus' teachings about MONEY. First response is that Pharisees are seeking worldly justification and what they prize is detestable. Pursuit of MONEY and prestige? Second response is that John the Baptist is the marker when the change in God's relationship to man or to Israel takes place -- from the Law and prophets to the coming of the kingdom. Time to enter the kingdom. Weird statement at the end about the law not passing away. Why then the kingdom? Third response is about divorce. What does this have to do with MONEY? Or the law? Or the kingdom? Or the Pharisees? Oh, wait, the pharisees. This goes against their teachings, especially the "loose cause" for divorce proponents.

Stage 2.
The overall focus of this chapter is on MONEY, wealth, material versus spiritual, and how we're to live as children of the light in a decidedly dark world. The final parables tells us that we can't/shouldn't measure righteousness by position in the world, and that righteousness will count for a lot more, eternally. We don't want to trade what the Pharisees have traded -- temporal reward for eternal reward. The statements in the middle verses, then, are directed against the pharisees, as is the final parable, in response to their criticism of Jesus' teaching His disciples about this new way of living and use of money -- for kingdom purposes.

Stage 3.

1. Jesus teaches about the proper use of resources.
1. Use them well.
2. Use them for the kingdom.
3. Use of them is one way to see our value as servants.
4. Don't get caught up in the acquisition/use of the resources -- serve God.
   
2. The pharisees object - they value worldly stuff.
1. Jesus tells them what God's values are.
2. Any justification they may look for in the law and prophets is superseded by the coming of the kingdom. Enter the kingdom (with its values).
3. The kingdom is the fulfillment of the law, so it doesn't pass away.
4. Look at your views on divorce, for example. They're wrong, and incomplete. Even the men are responsible in this area, in kingdom values.
3. The rich man and Lazarus - final teaching on what' s important.
   
1. If you have any doubts about God's view, look at the swapped positions.
2. Death is the point where the consequences of one's actions are meted out.
   
3. Once sold out, and serving MONEY, even a resurrection will be insufficient evidence for those who are hardened to the reality of eternity and eternal consequences.

Stage 4.
This is good enough to go forward with. As in other circumstances, Jesus teaches according to what's taking place. The pharisees are in for it again. What about me? The reality of being a shrewd steward is a hard one. I've failed in that, countless times. How do I do better, without letting the pursuit of MONEY become an overriding value? Use it for good purposes along the way. Keep kingdom priorities as priorities. Choice between working extra hours and family time -- choose family. Choice between good paying job and great paying job with large amounts of travel -- choose good paying job. Choice between expensive car and decent car -- got it. And while we're at it, work hard to get a good deal on the decent car. Bottom line -- beware of the pharisees' values which flipped God's priorities while seeming to serve and be blessed by God.

I'm ready to leave this chapter for now, but welcome any discussion on that shrewd manager.

A barbecue story. Luke 15.

I read somewhere that this chapter is probably the most familiar chapter of the New Testament. For me, it presents two challenges that are independent of the text itself. The first is pretty simple, what could I possibly write on the blog that would be original enough or useful enough to even bother with the writing? One possibility would be to provide some additional cultural context about shepherds or coins or Pharisees. Another would be to focus on some specific, new reaction of mine to the text. (No biggies there, although the image of being flung over Jesus' shoulders like a lost sheep had extra appeal as I read it last night.) I could also go find out what others have said about one of these parables and do a riff off of their thoughts. (William Barclay, for example, finds grounds for rejecting the Calvinist idea of "the total depravity of man" in this statement about the prodigal son in v.17, "but when he came to his senses", literally "came to himself.")

Instead of those possibilities, I'm going to focus on the other personal challenge in the parable of the loving father. Since it's personal, it'll at least be original. The challenge is this: where does one draw the line in looking at the details of this story? Is it enough to say, look at the context and realize that Jesus is telling this story to the Pharisees who can't understand why Jesus would eat with the tax collectors and sinners? That they are the older brother? Or do we need to dig down deeper into the story and draw more from the details, and if so, how far down do we dig? And do those details provide additional teaching or merely reinforce the main point -- God loves the lost and the big brothers in the family (Pharisees and teachers) ought to have the same attitude?

In the past, I've pretty much drawn the line at the main point. These are not real people, they're fictional. So if I have empathy for the father, it's only because I've had a somewhat similar experience of a child leaving our home and its values, or known someone who has had that experience. And while I think that approach is a valid one for any theology we might take from the parable, and it's always important to get the main point, I've changed in my thoughts about the details. Jesus told a rich, colorful, and memorable story here. All the details contribute to the main point. If there are those who talk as if this was an actual incident, perhaps that's not so awful as I once rigidly thought.

With that in mind, there are some details that add obvious force to the main point of the story. The fact that the son hits such low (and disgusting to the audience) circumstances -- to be tending swine -- is worth appreciating. That the father would be watching from afar is an indication of the depth of the father's love and concern, and a stark contrast to the elder son's attitude. That the father would clothe the son in a robe (honor), a ring (authority), and shoes (not barefoot like a servant), and celebrate, gives incredible hints at how deep the forgiveness of the father is, and how joyous it is to see the one who broke relationship, return. That the elder son is portrayed in such stark, grim, mean colors, provides the punch line to the audience. 'Pharisees, do you see what you've become, what you are? You consider your service to me a grinding duty, not a sharing of all the blessings I have. You have all the benefits of being in my presence, why wouldn't you be glad when others abandon their pride seek restoration of a once broken relationship?'

It's that last part of the lesson of Jesus that we can't miss when appreciating the details. Yes, we are the beneficiaries of the Father's gracious mercy. Yes, this is a picture of what Jesus' life and death mean to each one of us who broke relationship with the Father. But, we can't become the elder brother. We can't be resentful of the ones who have lived dissolutely and come late to repentance. We can't dissociate ourselves from those who need restored relationship in disgust or out of a sense of purity. We especially don't want attitudes of grim service to God, instead of joyous work in celebration of our own membership in His family.

Perhaps it's fitting that this reading comes so quickly after our barbecue on Sunday.

Let's find a fatted calf and have another barbecue.

Three thoughts on discipleship. Luke 14.

1. The opportunity to become a disciple is open to everyone, not just those originally invited into the kingdom, nor their leaders.

2. The cost of being a disciple is as high as you can pay, and before committing, determine if you're willing to pay.

3. The banquet will be rich beyond understanding, but come to celebrate the king, not just to eat and drink your fill.

Your message. Luke 13.

Updated.

Now there were some present on that occasion who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. He answered them, “Do you think these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered these things? No, I tell you! But unless you repent, you will all perish as well! Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower in Siloam fell on them, do you think they were worse offenders than all the others who live in Jerusalem? No, I tell you! But unless you repent you will all perish as well!” (Luke 13:1-5)

In the first nine verses of chapter 13, Luke continues telling about the events and teachings begun in chapter 12. The phrase, "on that occasion" points back to Luke 12:1, "Meanwhile, when many thousands of the crowd had gathered so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus began to speak first to his disciples..." During this sequence, with this large crowd, Jesus divided His attention between His close disciples and the larger crowd. At various times, people in the crowd would approach Jesus with specific requests, questions, and in this case, information.

Why did they bring that information to Jesus' attention? One possibility is that what Jesus had just said about "reading the signs" prompted these individuals to come forward, as if to say, "Jesus, is Pilate's heinous act a sign that the end is coming and you're going to rescue us as Messiah?" Whether prompted by Jesus or not, they must have expected that Jesus would, at least, condemn Pilate's actions. Another possibility is that they just wanted to hear how Jesus would respond to this alarming news. "What does the Master say?" (Is there a faint echo of WWJD in this?) Still another possibility is that they wanted to cause trouble. By providing this information they put Jesus in the middle of the authorities, Pilate, and the people, the Galileans who were angered by this action. "Choose a side, Jesus."

There's no indication in the text for any of these particular motivations, aside from the placement of this incident right after Jesus' admonition to "read the signs." But the consequences of how Jesus might respond leave open all the possible outcomes, regardless of the motivation: Jesus assumes the mantle of Messiah; Jesus condemns Pilate's actions, becoming more of a renegade; Jesus says nothing and incurs the wrath of the people. What other outcomes were possible?

Instead of anything I've suggested, or anything I might come up with, Jesus uses this information to teach the crowd. No commiserating over the unfairness of Pilate's actions, no condemnation, no bemoaning the fate of Israel's people, no hatred expressed toward the Roman occupiers. Not even a rabbinical discussion of how these sinners must have deserved what they got. This information becomes one more opportunity to deliver the message of the Kingdom's arrival and the need to repent. (Let me add I'm certain that had a relative of one of those Galileans come up to Jesus in distress with this news, His response would have been one of ministry first. See John 11:17-35.) And I'm blown away by that. Here's this disturbing news and it's immediately incorporated into Jesus' message. And not just through repetition.

The gist of what Jesus says in response to this news is twofold. First, toss out your outmoded way of thinking that calamity only befalls sinners. It would be useless to try and determine what these guys did wrong. Or those people in Siloam. Stuff happens. Second, though, don't consider yourself exempt from the consequences of sin. Just because you're the children of Abraham doesn't mean God won't judge you by what you've thought, said, and done. Turn away from that way of thinking, and live according to God's purposes. Remember He's the judge you will face, so straighten your life before you come to His judgment seat.

Then Jesus finishes this warning with a parable of the unproductive fig tree. The tree is only allowed to be unproductive for so long, and then it gets cuts down. Hear that folks? Repentence is measured by the fruit it bears. This is an important part of Jesus' message, which is often underplayed today. But for the moment, let's pay attention to the fact that it is part of Jesus' message. His message that is so paramount in His mind, that everything that happens to Him, every bit of news, every question asked about other things, even "acts of nature", can be incorporated into that message.

And what about your message? Our message? Not every one of us is gifted as a teacher, so we may not (heh, more like never) achieve such an ability to incorporate life into our message, and our message into our life. And let's remember, we're really talking about God's message. But, again, what about our message? Have we thought it through well enough so that in certain situations that message is at hand, and it shapes the way we think and live, and how we respond to what happens to us? And what precisely is our message?

Let me suggest just a few pieces of that message.

• It' s all about God. It's not about us.
• God loves us as only God can, and wants relationship with us.
• Jesus is God's entry out of time and into history to restore broken relationship.
  
• Stuff happens.
• God's love of us and our love of Him changes lives.
• God empowers us to grow to be more like His Son.

You can add to that list. Maybe you'll reduce it down to just a couple of items that express the message well. And you make that message yours. Which I think includes anticipation of different situations. Forethought. We have the lessons all through the Bible of how God's people responded under given circumstances, sometimes well, sometimes not so much. The more we become like Christ, the more we view the world as He did, and vice versa. So how would Jesus handle a given situation? What would His message be about it?

Here are a couple of ideas that aren't original with me, but which I have taken from others as expressions of God's message.

• "There are a lot of hypocrites in church." -- "What better place for them."
• "(Buddha, Krishna, ) taught about as Jesus did. What's the difference?" "Truth is truth. What else would you expect Jesus to teach? And truth isn't exclusive. But maybe we can look at some things that Jesus said that are unique to Him."
• "Did you hear about the pile up on highway 26. Four people were killed." There should be no pat answer to this, but depending on circumstances, it may be a useful time to indicate, "Whenever I hear about these kinds of things it reminds me of something that was reported to Jesus and His response."
• Added to original post. (Consider this dialog an internal one. Thought, not speech.) "How will I spend my time today?" "It's not my time." "Man, this is taking a lot of time." "It's not my time." "I don't have time to read my 5x5x5 today." "It's not my time."
  

These are not intended to be pat answers, or snarky, but simply a way to hang "my message" onto something that makes it available so that I'm not unprepared to share that message. This is what I think we're really called to do most of the time when we talk about a "testimony." It's not always about how we became Christians, but about how Christianity helps us understand and cope with the occurrences of life. (This includes the good stuff. Remember way back in chapter 3, where John says to be ready to share your blessings with others.)

Most important of all, this is not just a way of preparing to share God's message, but it's the way we live a life in response to His message. Anyone like to share their message? Anyone? Anyone?

Priorities and long division. Luke 12.

Do you remember your first attempts at doing long division? Did it come naturally? Or was it a major struggle? In my own case, I grasped the concept immediately. Doing the detail work, though, was somewhat problematic, because of a certain left-handed messiness, and a general antipathy toward organization. So sometimes my digits didn't align quite right, and sometimes I just preferred doing the work in my head. This was okay when the problem involved say, a two-digit divisor, but as the divisor got bigger, the need for a systematic approach grew quickly.

I was thinking about division because of what Jesus says in Luke 12:51, "Do you think I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!" I'll come back to this verse in a minute. First, let's look at priorities as established by Jesus throughout most of this chapter.

In one sense, Jesus begins his teaching in Luke 12 out of His reaction to the Pharisees and their inability to get things right in chapter 11. As He says in v.12:1, "Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy." And if His warning isn't enough, He lets us know that nothing will remain hidden. One day the rock will be turned over, exposing all those slugs, grubs, and other crawly things in our "hidden" life. Imagine the change in our life, if we lived every moment out in the open.

That warning is a first call to get our priorities straight. There is no room for the hidden stuff, let alone any time for it. No more talking behind someone's back. No more thinking behind someone's back. No more "whispers in private rooms."

Once started talking about the authorities, Jesus continues with more teaching on what's important. Remember that eternal consequences count a lot more than temporal ones. (And why do we need a reminder of that?) So, don't fear human authorities, fear God. Remember He knows you and values you. Acknowledge the Son of Man for Who He is. And if/when you are brought before the authorities, God will help you speak rightly. Remember your worldly riches are temporary, so store up the riches of God.

Continuing the theme of God's care for us, Jesus says put that as your first priority in your thinking. Release your anxiety about stuff, by recognizing His care.

More priorities. Be faithful and expectant servants of the Lord. At work, no matter His delay. (And what does that look like in your life? Seriously. Write it down in your Bible next to verses 12:35-48, or at the bottom of the page, or in your journal, or as a comment to this post.)

And then He hits us with the long division - the division even between family members that comes when He, Jesus, is our first priority. As He tells us, it will not be so for every family member. Not all will make Him first priority. Some won't make Him any priority. Division. In emotional terms, long division. In eventuality, eternal division. This is a place of no peace. Fortunately, He also tells us that our first priority as His disciples is to make more disciples. So we are commanded to share with, and not abandon, those who have yet to make Him first priority. But in the end, each person makes a choice, and the end of our division from the Father will leave us divided from those who don't end their division from the Father. Long, hard division. A division that wounds the Father infinitely more than us.

Getting our priorities straight, in accordance with the Father's will, as shown and taught by His Son, is not unlike doing long division. There's a system to it, a sequence. Put God first. Write the first number of the quotient above the dividing line. Pick an area of your life, say gossip. Multiply the divisor by the current quotient number, and write the product in the proper place under the dividend. Subtract those numbers. Remove the gossip. What remains? Treasuring worldly stuff more than Kingdom stuff? Write down your next number in the quotient, multiply with the divisor, record the result, line up with the dividend and subtract. Subtract out that treasuring. More remainder? Yep. Add zeros after the decimal point. As many as you need. How about time? What does it mean to have God as first priority when it comes to time?

I may have gotten a little carried away with the long division details. Let's finish this way. To do long division, you need a pattern to follow, and the arithmetic principles underlying the application of that pattern. Principles and system. In Jesus' teaching about how we are to live, He established a principle of priority, and then showed how it applied to some particulars of His followers' (and our) lives. It was systematic, even if the narrative wasn't hierarchical as I've just stated it. This is how we can love the Lord our God with our mind -- use that mind to apply what know to how we live. When it comes to loving with soul, heart, and strength there will be other principles, and it won't necessarily be so dry and rational. It'll include the response of love and desire to be with Him that prompted Peter to step out of the boat and to swear he would never deny his Lord. It'll include the absorption of these mind lessons into our very being -- transforming us to into the likeness of Christ, living completely open lives with our priorities naturally correct.

Study Guide. Luke 11.

Let's keep it simple today. Six times Jesus says "woe to you." (Woe is kind of archaic, so the NLT translates that as "How terrible it will be ...." Your assignment? Identify the nature of the reason for Jesus saying it each time, and then summarize those reasons into as small a summary statement as possible. My answers in a comment late tonight.

The privilege of our day. Luke 10.

Yesterday we considered the fact that our distance from Jesus' time and culture can make for hard sayings in the Bible. Kind of a deficit in getting to know Him, and through Him the Father. One verse in today's reading, however, reminded me that we also have some privileges living today that others down through history never had, in getting to know Jesus. In v.10:23, Luke records, "Then Jesus turned to his disciples and said privately, 'Blessed are the eyes that see what you see!'"

Hmmm. Are those my eyes? Do I get to see what they saw? As a matter of fact, yes. At least I get to see some of Jesus' life and teachings through the gospels, and if not first-hand, then at least through God's inspiration. And living today, I can carry around those words of God in a bag, a purse, the car, even a phone. And I have the luxury of having several copies of those words, with ready access pretty much any time I want. Not only that, but there are a wealth of tools available to make up for the fact that I wasn't there in the first century to physically experience what the disciples did.

There's much more that could be said about this saying of Jesus, but it's enough today, to simply let the significance of His thought sink in. I am blessed ... we are blessed, to live at a time when God has already stepped into history, and the Kingdom has arrived in part.

For those of you interested, here are a couple of pictures of Korazin. The first is a shot looking towards a part of the ruins of the town. (click on the picture to make it larger). The second is the interior of a block of buildings around a courtyard. And the third picture shows the remains of the synagogue.

Once again, these photos are from the fabulous website, Holy Land Photos, www.holylandphotos.org, and used under their 4 photo permission.

Hard sayings. Luke 9. (Updated below.)

In 1983, F. F. Bruce published a book titled, The Hard Sayings of Jesus. This proved to be such a popular book, that it was republished twice, and several other books with similar titles, covering other parts of the Bible, were written by others to form a series. They are now compiled into one volume, The Hard Sayings of the Bible. I like F. F. Bruce a lot, and own the original book, although I rarely consult it these days, doing so much of my study on the computer. (Thinking about that, maybe I should pull it off the shelf, and make it some of my light summer reading.) But the phrase, "hard saying," is a memorable one, and it came to mind reading Luke 9. Here's some of what the Publisher's Preface says about hard sayings.

"What F. F. Bruce wrote in his introduction to The Hard Sayings of Jesus can likely be said of nearly all the difficult texts in this collection: they may be hard for two different reasons. First are those that, because of differences in culture and time, are hard to understand without having their social and historical backgrounds explained. Second are those that are all too easily understood but that challenge the ways we think and act."

It is the latter sense, of Jesus' challenge to the ways we think and act, that I had in mind, although Jesus' phrasing in this instance, also presents some linguistic and cultural challenges to us as well. Here's the text.

"As they were walking along the road, someone said to him, 'I will follow you wherever you go.' Jesus said to him, 'Foxes have dens and the birds in the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.' Jesus said to another, 'Follow me.' But he replied, 'Lord, first let me go and bury my father.' But Jesus said to him, 'Let the dead bury their own dead, but as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.' Yet another said, 'I will follow you, Lord, but first let me say goodbye to my family.' Jesus said to him, 'No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.'" (Luke 9:57-62 NET)

Before digging in, I do want to point out that this is a passage where we can easily see Luke's organizational hand at work in compiling the events of Jesus' life into his "orderly account." Here, he's grouped three separate incidents together, because they contain different sayings of Jesus about the meaning of following Him. The cumulative effect is to see the commitment required of a disciple. The larger context, too, is all about discipleship. At the beginning of the chapter the twelve are sent out to replicate Jesus' ministry under His authority -- without support of any kind. In verses 23 and 24, Jesus lays it on the line. Following Him means denying yourself and picking up your cross every day. That's a hard enough saying for all of us and I could end there. But I won't.

Jesus' statement of the cost of discipleship is very hard. He also says that the reward is very great -- our very lives, and the sharing of the glory of the Son and the Father. (Another time, we should take a look at precisely what this means so that it's not just a Christian phrase without real impact. Or, one of you readers could comment on this right now.) We don't want to lose sight of that fact -- discipleship is worth whatever it costs and more. With that in mind, let's examine Jesus challenge to some of His "followers."

There are three followers who are challenged by Jesus in Luke 9:57-62. Perfect for a sermon, eh? My reaction to a first reading through these verses was, "man, Jesus was really harsh on these guys. He's trying to wash them out." How about you? Upon reflection, I realized that my understanding was correct, but my reaction, an underlying thought that maybe Jesus was too harsh, was incorrect. Better to prepare them for what may lie ahead. One lesson from these incidents, then, is what they have in common -- Jesus tells a follower that being a follower is hard.

After a little more reflection, and I realized that the fact that there are three followers, three responses from Jesus, and they're not the same, is a sure sign that I should dig deeper. What can I, what can we, learn from the differences in these three incidents?

Follower #1. "I'll follow you wherever you go." This guy was eager. Maybe naive, too. Maybe even boastful. Jesus response is to pour some cold water of reality on that follower. 'You'll be homeless.' Here some cultural knowledge can be helpful. Homelessness was very rare in 1st century Palestine. One might be very poor, but would still have a place to stay. As today, this is really the bottom of the barrel in terms of status and security. In essence, Jesus is saying that "wherever I go" is an unknown all the time, with no security, no promise of anything, and I want you to understand that. Be prepared.

Follower #2. If the first follower was eager, the second one was somewhat reluctant. Or confused in his priorities. A son's responsibility for burying his father was a very important one, an implied duty of the commandment to honor father and mother. But Jesus said that the call to preach the Kingdom of God was higher. There is no higher responsibility than answering Jesus' call to discipleship.

Follower #3. At first glance, there doesn't seem to be much difference between this follower and the previous one. But the man who wanted to bury his father was, at least, delaying for what would seem to be an important reason. This follower, though, wants to delay his following until a few goodbyes are given. More than reluctant, we might say this person is a "maybe someday" follower. Or, a distracted follower. Or, a "discipleship is low priority" follower. Jesus' response indicates, again, that discipleship is the highest priority. It requires the same kind of one-minded attention that plowing requires. (If that picture doesn't make sense, think about what you learned in driver's ed -- where your head goes, the car goes.)

All of these sayings are simple enough to understand. But they are as hard as diamonds when it comes to obeying them. I'd like to add, however, that if you understand the consequences (no nest, no den), and make the commitment (as highest, maybe even, only, priority) and stick to it with single minded purpose, the obeying gets easier, at least some of the time. After all, we get to walk the paths of our life with Jesus.

Update.
I meant to point out, but posted too quickly, the deeper ideas contained in the latter two incidents where we see a response to a call by Jesus to follow. In the case of follower #2, he asked Jesus for time to complete his responsibilities under the law (the 5th commandment). In essence, Jesus was saying that the Kingdom of God is now here, a fulfillment of the Law, and so, of course, its announcement takes precedence. In the case of follower #3, the reference to plowing reminds us of the incident where Elijah called Elisha (1 Kings 19:19-21) to the office of prophet while Elisha was plowing. There, too, Elisha asked to be able to say goodbye to family, which Elijah permitted, while still noting the importance of the call. Elisha cleaned up his affairs and then reported to Elijah. Jesus response indicates that the call to follow Him is more radical, more important, and more immediate than was the call to succeed Elijah.

Selections from the chapter. Luke 6.

On Wednesday, we were to read Luke 6. And I did. But early in the day, my brain changed holiday into weekend. No posts on the weekends. No post on the holiday. I even thought about writing a special post (not on Luke 6) about an encounter I'd had with a bookstore owner, and how our 5x5x5 read through was impacting lives, but not the daily post. As it turned out, our holiday was busy and filled with solid family time. I hope your holiday was similarly blessed. Some time in the middle of the fireworks extravaganza at our daughters' house (40 or so fairly tame, legal, fountains, ground flowers, and monster trucks), I realized, "hey, I need to update the blog." After arriving home at 11:15 pm, I knew I was just too tired to even finish a post before midnight. So I decided to wait until the weekend to write about Luke 6. So, think of this post as a make-up quiz.

In thinking about all of our reading for the week in Luke, something that really stands out is how artificial the chapters separations are in this gospel. As we've discussed before, chapters and verses are artificial divisions added to the Bible, to help us easily refer to the same location in a given book. It's not that the chapters in Luke are unreasonable divisions, but clearly the chapters are longer than most of the chapters we've read in the rest of the New Testament. And there's a lot packed into them. Luke could easily be several chapters longer with each chapter containing less material, and the groupings would then be more logical.

Said another way, it's our adherence to reading one chapter a day, rather than logical blocks of text, that puts some episodes next to others, that may or may not be logically related in Luke's telling. Keep in mind that generally speaking, the fact that one story is right next to another should always be looked at carefully to determine if the writer wants us to look at those stories in relationship to one another to get additional meaning not contained in each individual story. We often describe this as the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. But a chapter division doesn't necessarily mean all the events should be considered together.

I find that to be the case in these long chapters of Luke. There are three main sections to chapter 6: the Sabbath incidents, the calling of the twelve, and the sermon on the flat place on the mount. If we look at the first and last sections, we might be tempted to think that because they are in the same chapter, Luke wants us to see something more than what is contained in each separate section. I don't think that's the case here. However, if we step back and look at several chapters together, then it's possible to see big themes which relate many incidents to one another. For example, we could talk about what's taken place from somewhere in the middle of chapter 4 extending at least through chapter 6 under the broad idea of Jesus' authority. In that case, the Sabbath incidents in chapter 6 might be described as Jesus demonstrating His authority over the Sabbath, and the sermon as Jesus demonstrating His authority in teaching (or understanding the Law). But this relationship has little to do with the fact that they're in the same chapter.

Therefore, the next couple of thoughts are just random responses to Luke 6. No particular connection to one another, except in the sense that they're both about Jesus. Heh.

I love the detail Luke gives us concerning Jesus' choice of the 12 apostles. "Now it was during this time that Jesus went out to the mountain to pray, and he spent all night in prayer to God. When morning came, he called his disciples and chose twelve of them, whom he also named apostles:" (Luke 6:12,13) A careful reading in all the gospels show that this happened often in Jesus' life -- time spent in solitude and prayer, in preparation for, and followed by, significant decisions in His ministry. This is what Jesus did. This is what we should do.

And speaking of what we should do, Jesus more or less sums up His sermon with these words in v.6:46, "Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?". He then goes on to describe what it's like to obey or not in the rest of the chapter, but the question alone ought to be enough for us. What do we mean when we say, "Lord?" Is it just a word? A meaningless sound that tumbles from our lips effortlessly, while the living out of its meaning remains the effort we're unwilling to exert? Let me remove the "our" and "we're" from that question, and replace them with "my" and "I'm". What areas of my life remain outside His Lordship by my choice? Is it time for my night of prayer to God, so He might illumine them? And if I'm submitted to follow Him, however imperfectly, am I challenging others to do likewise? Am I, by example and by speech, helping others to grow in their understanding of what Jesus taught and exhorting them to obey, as Jesus said to do as recorded in Matthew 28:18-20? Jesus left no doubt here. Either stop calling Him Lord, or do what He told us, in word and deed.

Time's up. I'm turning in my makeup quiz now. Out of all of Luke 6, what were you challenged by? Or inspired to?

Familiar stories. Luke 8.

After Luke's introductory comments about the women who were supporting Jesus, he tells us about six incidents and teachings in the life of Jesus. These are very familiar stories. Not only are they preached about often, but they are recorded in all the gospels. Just this year, then, we've already read about the parable of the soils and the lamp, the declaration that those who believe in Jesus are His family, the storm on the sea, the naked guy in the cemetery, the raising of Jairus' daughter, and the healing of the bleeding woman. Twice. Some of you may have read and heard these stories hundreds of times.

I'm wondering what you do when you encounter a familiar story? How do you read through it? Do you zip through it, almost skimming? Is there a comfort level, and you relax into the story? Are you able to "get" anything from the passage? Does the familiarity draw you closer to Jesus, like a family story can do? ("Remember the day when Uncle ...? That was so funny. And you ended up ... Uncle ... is a great uncle, isn't he?") Or does the familiarity distance you, because you don't engage with the text because it's so familiar? Like a family story can do? ("When is she going to finish this story? I've already heard it four times today. Hmmm. Wonder how the Blazers will do with that new draft pick? What? Did I hear you? Of course I did. Just not this time.") So how about it? What was your response to these familiar passages today?

You may have noticed that I called the incident that takes place in the Gerasenes, when Jesus is confronted by the man possessed by multiple demons, and sends the demons into a herd of pigs, "the naked guy in the cemetery." That was purposeful. It's one of the ways that I personally work with familiar stories -- shake them up in some way to place a fresh emphasis on a particular aspect, add some fun to them, or some drama, or make connections to our life today or my life in particular. Thinking about someone so nuts he lives naked in a cemetery is one way to highlight the profound change that Jesus made in this person's life by casting out Legion. Maybe another time, I might want to highlight Jesus authority over the demonic by highlighting what happens to the pigs.

I really am curious about what happens when you read familiar passages. I have no idea if what happens to me is typical or not. And it does vary from time to time and passage to passage. This morning I really had to work at staying in the text, and not just rip through it. When that happens, here are some things I may do to take a fresh look.

• Stop and pray. This might be all you do, and come back to the text later. At a minimum, ask God for one specific teaching you might take away from the text for the day. What is it He wants me to know?
  
• Slow down.
• Read out loud.
  
• Read a bigger chunk of text. Big pictures help us see patterns and connections that are a part of God's message for us not contained in the details. In today's reading, for example, it might be helpful to remember the "sinful woman" at the end of chapter 7.
  
• Read a smaller chunk of text. Narrowing our focus allows us to expand the way we can think about the passage. This is something like slowing down, and might include doing some of the following tips.
• Put oneself into the picture. I may have shared this in the past, but the full story of Jairus, his daughter, and the hemorrhaging woman, is one that has always been a fruitful one for me to use my active imagination.
• Compare parallel accounts, if there are any. In the case of Luke 8, it's possible to do this for every episode. Here, you can look for God's message as spoken through the writers. Why did Mark give us this particular detail, for example?
• Lookup quoted material, when applicable. Take advantage of the cross references in your Bible to find the Old Testament references and read those references with surrounding context.
• Rewrite the passage in your own words. If the passage is really familiar you should be able to do this easily. Do it from memory, and then go back and compare your version to the text. Did you leave anything out? Did you add anything to the story? Reflect on that.
• Write a targeted paraphrase. What I mean by that is to think of particular audiences that might read your paraphrase, or that you might tell it to --- like 2nd to 4th graders, or movie fans.
  
• Memorize the passage. The more familiar the passage, the easier to memorize.
• Examine your life, and see if you've made any progress since the last time you read the passage. Ouch. From Luke 8, am I a better listener to God's message than I was when I last read about the light on the lamp stand?
  

This is by no means an exhaustive list of ways to overcome a disengaged reading of familiar stories, but it's a start. It's a real treat when the opposite reaction happens -- a fully engaged reading of the familiar. These are the moments when God's Spirit really illuminates a passage, because we're not getting in the way. Like a family story, like a moment actually experienced in our own life, we're sitting in the boat as it approaches the shore, with the fishermen and the tax collector and the others, and the teacher asks us to, "Come." with Him as He steps ashore. And the naked guy comes storming out of the cemetery, screaming, "leave me alone", and we can't wait to see what happens next, because we've learned that Jesus is master over everything.

Getting it right, getting it wrong. Luke 7.

The incidents at the beginning and end of Luke 7, provide a sharp contrast in reaction to the person of Jesus by those with authority. It's hard to miss the irony that it's the Roman official, the centurion, who recognizes the authority in Jesus' person, and the Jewish men dedicated to the Law, that don't. The actions of the centurion echo what Luke said earlier about the people, even in Nazareth, who recognized that Jesus spoke with authority. (See v.4:32,36)

Looking at the contrast of reactions, we could narrow our focus to just the final incident in chapter 7 -- Jesus' foot washing by the "fallen woman" at the home of a Pharisee -- and still see that when confronted by the person of Jesus, some get it right, and some get it wrong, in their response to Him. As I look at both incidents, I see the makings of a great sermon theme. Or a really long blog post. Which I don't want to happen.

So, while you can think about the faith of the centurion, and his understanding of authority, and his recognition of such in Jesus, I'm going to skip to the end of the chapter and talk about just one small piece of the narrative that struck a chord in me this morning. Here's the passage:

Therefore I tell you, her sins, which were many, are forgiven, thus she loved much; but the one who is forgiven little loves little.” Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, “Who is this, who even forgives sins?” He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” (Luke 7:47-50 NET)

In order to keep this post short, I won't recap all that's happened to this point. You've read it, so you know that at this moment, Simon has been taught by Jesus the reason He would allow a sinful woman such intimate physical contact. In fact, Jesus led Simon to teach himself, through a brief story and a relevant question. Jesus has also pointed out that this woman had taken care of a responsibility that should have been Simon's as host -- a kiss of greeting, a foot washing, and an anointing for the guest. (The foot washing should have been done by a servant, at a minimum, although a true receiving of Jesus as a respected teacher might have required that Simon himself do it.)

As these lessons are sinking in, Jesus tells the woman, "Your sins are forgiven." And rather than reflecting on all that has taken place up to this moment, both in Simon's house, and all around the countryside, the men of the law can only respond with affront, that Jesus would say such a thing. They miss the point, completely. Not without reason, of course, but nevertheless, one has hope in the fact that Simon has invited Jesus to his house. Maybe this Pharisee has taken into account the reports of Jesus circulating through the villages of Galilee. Good grief, they've probably at least heard that something amazing happened in Nain to the dead son of a widow.

But they miss the point, because those words of Jesus bang head on into their preconceived ideas of how God works, and their inability to grasp the possibility that God continues to work. God's work and His continued revelation had always brought on new understandings of Who He is, and what He would do in honoring His covenant with Israel. Before Moses at Mt. Sinai there was no law. But there was the covenant. The law was a new work of God, that changed the nature of the relationship of Him with His covenant people. Later, Jeremiah told the people that God would bring a new covenant, one that would be written on the peoples' hearts. And recently, John the baptizer had come with a new message, recognized by the people as a message from God, that they needed to repent and do something new -- demonstrate their repentance in a ceremonial washing. New stuff.

And look at what has just taken place in Simon's house. Jesus arrived, a woman of sordid reputation (earned) came to Him in response to the message of Jesus of God's love for her and the opportunity for her to be a part of His kingdom. The good old boys thought Jesus would have nothing to do with her because of her past, and therefore He must not be a prophet. But Jesus demonstrated that He was a prophet by calling them out on their thinking, and that as a prophet He wanted everything to do with her. He further demonstrated His effectiveness as a teacher, forcing Simon to an understanding of both the woman's motivation and God's love, almost against his will ("I suppose..."). And he did that while also forcing Simon to recognize his failures as a host. While all of what Jesus did, except the prophetic part, could have been accomplished by a really good teacher, think of the intensity in this situation, all brought to bear in a matter of moments. The Pharisees sitting in judgment in one moment, only to have it all turned upside down in the time it takes to tell a quick story, ask a question, and expand on the answer. Maybe 5 minutes at the most.

Having said all of that, here's what got to me this morning. I'm just like those Pharisees. I seem to always be missing the main point. (You might think I've missed it in this blog entry.) I hear something, I read something, I see something, and a little piece sticks out, and all of a sudden I've missed the big picture. Maybe it goes like this: I'm introduced to someone new. There's an importance to the one doing the introduction that the two of us meet. And I should know that because, the person doing the introduction has spoken of the person I'm meeting before this moment. But all I hear is that they're from Phoenix and I remember my brief time living there. Or I'm put off by a limp handshake. Or any number of irrelevant details. And it's only later that I realize what the connection should have been, what the points of commonality should have been, and the opportunity missed. Ouch.

While that's hard stuff, there's often an opportunity to make up for it. But when it comes to Jesus, if we miss the main point, if we don't get it right, eventually we'll run out of opportunities to get it right. We'll even build up a hardness to ever getting it right. Simon and the boys may have already been there. God was doing a new thing, the ultimate thing, and they missed it.

Lord, while I've gotten it right when it comes to acknowledging your Son and His death and resurrection, help me get the other stuff right, too. Especially when it comes to sharing your truths with others -- getting the truths right, and getting the relationships right. Let my tears fall in gratitude and wash your feet.

Celebration. Luke 5.

There are 4 episodes within this chapter of Luke. I'd like to look at the last one -- the calling of Levi. Originally, I was thinking of calling this post, "Grumpy Bear," but when looking for a picture of a grumpy bear, I found out that this phrase has been pretty much captured by the American Greetings card company, and their Care Bears. Also, it's probably not enough to refer to the religious leaders of Jesus' time as simply grumpy -- they were angrier and more hostile than grumpy, even if in this episode they seem more like party poops.

And I really don't have much to say about what takes place here. (Well, I'll make a brief comment about Jesus' cryptic comment at the end of the chapter.) There's nothing complex about what happens. Levi, a tax collector, is called by Jesus to follow Him, and he quits his despised, although lucrative, occupation, and does just that. And then he throws a party. This is way cool.

There will be time for Levi to take up his cross. There will be hard days ahead. Jesus even tells the grumpy bear Pharisees, that this will happen (when the bridegroom is gone). But right at that moment, when Jesus enters Levi's life and gives new meaning to it, Levi is ready to drop everything in response to Jesus, and celebrate what's taken place. And he wants to share what has happened with all his friends, and Jesus, too. Could there ever be a more natural reaction than what we see taking place here? Did it happen in your life? Does it happen in your life?

We have a close friend who sat on the fence for six months or so after hearing about Jesus, and really having an understanding of Who He is, and what He did. My wife finally asked her, "So, what's keeping you from becoming a Christian?" Two answers, as I recall. One was a reluctance to the label Christian, which for many in our culture has a bad reputation, sometimes deserved, sometimes not. The second answer was a reluctance to give up her old life. The fun stuff. When pressed about her understanding of Jesus, she/they realized, it was too late. She already was a Christian. And in reality, the fun stuff just began.

Yes, old things go away in our life when we decide to follow Jesus. And the path we walk is often difficult. But what could possibly compare to the incomparable joy we have in following Him. Levi knew that. He wanted his friends to know that. And so, "Then Levi gave a great banquet in his house for Jesus, and there was a large crowd of tax collectors and others sitting at the table with them." (v.5:29).

One quick comment, and then let's go celebrate this day the Lord has made. Jesus says at the end of His parable about the new teaching replacing the old. "No one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, ‘The old is good enough.’" (v.5:39) In the NIV, it says the old is "better." Out of context, this phrase can be easily misused. What Jesus is really talking about here, is the reluctance that He's already seeing to His message. He's describing the human tendency to resist change, after telling everyone that the change must happen. So He isn't actually prescribing a good behavior, He's describing an existing behavior. (I suspect Jesus has taken an existing saying of the time, and turned it to His own use, but I can't confirm that.)

Now go celebrate.