Two verses

Were you ever taught this little rhyme?

Sticks and stones
may break my bones
but names will never hurt me.

I was. I might even have believed it. But today's reading from Proverbs gives the lie to that little ditty:

Reckless words pierce like a sword,
but the tongue of the wise brings healing.

Proverbs 12:18

I've been both perpetrator and victim of the "reckless words" part, and I've lived long enough to know it. Fortunately, as time has gone on, I've had chances to bring healing as well.

Much of the time the way this works is that I place my tongue behind my teeth and press my lips together, but if I can keep my head about me, mirror and validate feelings, and pray for someone, they can become open to healing from God. After all, it says the tongue of the wise brings healing; it does not say that the tongue of the wise itself heals. (I just noticed that now.)

Here is a verse that bothers and confuses me. It's from the book of Deuteronomy. Moses is preaching to the nation of Israel, talking about the blessings (or curses) they will receive if they obey God (or rebel against him). So far so good. I mean, some parts sound a little harsh, but basically I think I get it. And then I read this:

Just as it pleased the Lord to make you prosper and increase in number, so it will please him to ruin and destroy you. You will be uprooted from the land you are entering to possess.

Deuteronomy 28.63

I have looked at this passage in various versions, hoping that at least one of them wouldn't say "it will please him" to ruin and destroy the Israelites.

This is the only place I know of where it says he will happily ruin and destroy his chosen people. Elsewhere we read things like I take no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies (from Ezekiel) or he does not willingly bring affliction to the sons of men (from the Psalms).

What does this mean? Is it just a literary device? Or does it mean what he says?

One meta-answer is that God's character is not easily explained. But need this trouble us? The servants do not completely understand the master's psyche.

More on this tomorrow, when we look at Deuteronomy 29:29

posted 4/6

Don't get too distracted

You've heard people say sometimes, "I resemble that remark"? I sometimes resemble this passage:

Now as they were traveling along, they entered a certain village, where a woman named Martha welcomed them into her home. She had a sister called Mary, who moreover was seated at the Lord's feet, listening to his word. But Martha was distracted with all her preparations, and she came up to him and said, "Lord, don't you care that my sister has left me to do all the serving alone? Then tell her to help me!"

But Jesus answered her, "Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about many things, but only a few things are necessary, really only one. Mary has chosen the good part, and it will not be taken from her."

Luke 10.38-42

It was probably nearly 20 years ago, and David and Karen were over for dinner. Meal preparation did not go exactly according to plan, and I was trying to catch up. After dinner, I was popping up, asking, "How about some coffee?" when Karen got me to sit down.

"Why don't you just sit down and talk some more? That would be better," she said. Or something like that. She was very gentle, not sounding exasperated, but just wanting us to enjoy each other's company.

I took that as a gift from the Lord, making the above passage real to me.

I'd like to tell you that since that time I've slowed down and taken more time to be at peace, to listen to the Lord's words, to enjoy fellowship with Jesus and with others. Is it true? I don't know, but it's something to aim for.

The glory of... ministry?

In today's New Testament reading from Luke's gospel, Jesus is en route to Jerusalem. He sends 72 of his followers ahead of him with instructions to heal the sick and cast out demons.

¹⁷The seventy-two returned with joy and said, "Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name."

¹⁸He replied, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. ¹⁹I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you. ²⁰However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven."

Luke 10.17-20

What is Luke telling us here? Or rather, what is the Lord saying, and why did Luke think this exchange was significant?

By the way, as someone once pointed out, Jesus did not speak in Greek. Since all the books of the New Testament, and in particular the gospels, are written in Greek, all four gospel accounts -- Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John -- are translations. So although Greek is the "original language" that the New Testament was written down in, it's not the language spoken by the Lord Jesus.

I think Jesus saw something subtle happening in his disciples. Yes, there were more blatant things too (like wanting to sit on either side of his throne in the Kingdom of Heaven), but this was a subtler trap, one that the Holy Spirit moved Luke to record for us.

Do not rejoice, Jesus said, because of your spiritual authority -- don't glory in being able to heal the sick or drive out demons or feed the starving or whatever. But why not? Shouldn't we be glad when the sick are healed, when demons are driven out, when the hungry are fed?

Here's my take on it: of course we can be glad, but we should rejoice that we are in the Master's hands, lest we pursue the use of our power just for the joy of exercising it. If I imagine a knife rejoicing in being able to cut straight and cleanly, I might also imagine saying to that knife, "Don't rejoice in making a clean cut; rejoice rather that you're part of your master's plan to feed the family (or whatever)." I would not want the knife to go cutting things that it shouldn't, for the sheer joy of cutting.

Well, that may have been rather a strange example, but it would not surprise me if that's what happened to the devil and his angels -- whoa, it just hit me now, Jesus mentions Satan just before that, doesn't he?

Well, then let us rejoice that we belong to Jesus, not in any accomplishments -- academic, professional, financial, or even spiritual.

Jesus the homeless

A recent sermon made the point that Jesus was homeless, and I was reminded of that when I noticed this in today's reading from Luke:

⁵¹As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem.... ⁵⁷As they were walking along the road, a man said to him, "I will follow you wherever you go." ⁵⁸Jesus replied, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head."

Luke 9:57-58

Now there's a bizarre interaction. My initial reaction was to feel like a wimp, because I'm not signing up to leave my house and mortgage, my 401(k) and IRA and 529 accounts for the kids' college educations. But looking at the passage, it seems a little, uh, strange. Jesus is walking along, resolutely, toward Jerusalem. They come to a village. A guy walks up and says, "I'll follow you," but he doesn't, really. Jesus didn't recruit him; he just volunteered -- but half-heartedly.

It's interesting to see how Jesus deals with various people. Some, who have no idea of what to say, come to him for healing or something, and he meets them more than half-way. Others he seems indifferent about -- like this fellow.

Here's something that comes to mind. Jesus talked about how the poor in spirit were blessed. This fellow who came up to him was effectively saying, "I have what it takes to sign up with you." He presented himself as an adequate, dedicated, zealous guy who could follow wherever the Lord would take him.

Apparently, Jesus had another opinion -- an opinion that was confirmed when the man didn't sign up after all.

Jesus meets some other people in this brief passage, and none of them follow him. They have various excuses, and you can read in commentaries about what "let me go and bury my father" really means.

But today, as I rode the train to the office, the image of Jesus, the Lord of the universe, my master and savior, as a homeless rabbi -- well, that was something to think about.

Patton or Moses?

In the movie Patton, George C. Scott addresses the troops before battle, telling them that he doesn't want any of them dying for his country. Wars aren't won that way, he remarks. "What I want you to do," he growls, "is make the other SOB die for his country!"

That's what movies are like. But here's what Moses directed for a pre-battle speech.

⁵The officers shall say to the army: "Has anyone built a new house and not dedicated it? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else may dedicate it. ⁶Has anyone planted a vineyard and not begun to enjoy it? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else enjoy it. ⁷Has anyone become pledged to a woman and not married her? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else marry her." ⁸Then the officers shall add, "Is any man afraid or fainthearted? Let him go home so that his brothers will not become disheartened too."

Deuteronomy 20:5-8

Patton had strategy and tough talk; the children of Israel had the Lord God All-Powerful. But this speech from Deuteronomy is more practical and certainly more realistic, because really, anyone can die in battle. Even if victory is ultimately assured, things go wrong and people are killed. Hey, people are even killed on the highway from time to time. So it's prudent to excuse a guy from military service if he's betrothed, a new homeowner, etc.

It's more than prudent; there is something humane about it, whatever else you think about war. It doesn't say that one man's life is more valuable than another's, but it acknowledges that there are seasons in a man's life that would be particularly bad times to be killed in battle.

It also acknowledges that whatever the mission, there are seasons in your life or in mine where we are not supposed to go -- into battle, onto the mission field, or even onto a committee. This passage doesn't give us detailed guidelines, but again, whatever the mission, whatever the job is in God's kingdom, he is not desperate for soldiers; his resources are adequate. Of course, if I am called for something, I should go do it. But a need at this time for this particular purpose is not necessarily a call on that person in particular to fill it.

Hyper-responsible people might want to consider that.

And how about those who, like me, are less than hyper-responsible? We'll handle that another day.

posted 4/2

Happy Birthday Sheri!

Yes it's her birthday, but she's going to school anyway.

** posted on her actual birthday, but i don't want to tell the world what day that was.

The king should set an example -- and so should you

Today's Old Testament reading, from Deuteronomy, gives the children of Israel a command about their future kings.

¹⁴When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you ... and you say, "Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us," ¹⁵be sure to appoint over you the king the Lord your God chooses.... ¹⁶The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself.... ¹⁷He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.

¹⁸When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law... ¹⁹It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees ²⁰and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.

from Deuteronomy 17:14-20

So what is this list of commands about? Why are they given? And so what? Here's my take on it. Kings have the same set of tendencies that the rest of us do, and these commands appear to be a set of prudent practices -- they are ways to avoid certain kinds of trouble. Especially that last one -- write a copy of the Law and read it all the days of his life.

But in addition to that precept, there are three prohibitions: against acquiring a lot of horses, wives, and cash (there's actually a fourth, about going back to Egypt, which most of them avoided). I would think the temptation would be tremendous to raise a standing army of mounted troops. Especially if you're a fairly small country surrounded by powerful, ancient enemies. Same deal with political marriages. And money? Hey, in the U.S. we have a whole department, a Cabinet-level position, to deal with the treasury (only ours has a negative balance).

This was quite a counter-cultural command given here, one that foresaw some of the difficulties of Solomon's reign. The kingdom of Israel was to be something entirely unlike the kingdoms of the rest of the world.

What's the lesson here for us today, in the church age? I think the temptation is tremendous for us Christians, or us as the church universal, to raise piles of money, to try to move the levers of political power, etc. In other words, to act like any other interest group.

How are we to be "entirely unlike" the kingdoms of the world? And how am I personally to be "entirely unlike" those who do not know our Lord? I'm not sure about the answers, but I am sure that "Uh, we're supposed to act differently from everyone else? Really?" is not it.

We've been called out, set apart -- like the children of Israel were. They had some successes and some failures, just as we do. I'm not sure what specifically I'm to do with today's passage, other than to remember that we're called to be different, set apart. You can probably think of some specifics.

If I come up with anything non-obvious, I'll let you know.

posted 4/2