Indestructible

Today's reading from the New Testament shows Jesus confronted by two enemies. The first is the devil, who came to him in the desert, telling him to turn stones into bread;

Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone.'"

Luke 4:4

(Oddly enough, Matthew 4:3-4 say nearly the same thing as Luke 4:3-4.) Three times the devil tries to derail Jesus, and three times Jesus replies by quoting the Scriptures. Then the devil leaves.

A little further down, Jesus enters the synagogue, and reads something from the Scriptures and makes a few comments. Note what happens next.

²⁸All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. ²⁹They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him down the cliff. ³⁰But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.

Luke 4.28-30

By the way, in the first confrontation, the devil attacks first, and Jesus responds with Scripture; in the second one, Jesus reads and comments upon the Scripture, and the people respond by attacking him.

Anyway, I don't think this passage proves it necessarily, but I've heard it said that "You are indestructible until you've accomplished God's will for you." Which I guess makes sense, if we believe God is fully in control of the world. It also explains the boldness I see in some people, who believe God has called them to minister in conditions that others find too dangerous; they are emboldened by their sense of mission.

And I think of some mission pioneers, who went into the mission field, taking their possessions in a pine box, about 1' by 2' by 6', or maybe a little longer for the taller missionaries. They would go out, these young men and women, each with their own box. And a few years later, their lifeless body would be shipped home in that same box. But each one, before they died, was confident that they had done God's will for their lives; they were indestructible until that point.

And so are we. Most of us aren't that bold -- I'm certainly not. But perhaps there is a little boldness that the Lord would like to give us. What might it be for you or for me today? We really are indestructible, you know -- until our time.

What was that temptation about, anyway?

After reading the passage to the younger teen tonight, I remembered a sermon we heard about this when we were living in Tokyo and attending Musashino Chapel Center. So I thought I'd tell you about it.

The temptations were three: tell the stone to become bread (or "stones" in Matthew's account); throw yourself down from the temple in a spectacular display that will have people talking for weeks; worship me and I'll give you power over all the kingdoms of the earth.

Those things -- bread (nothing wrong with bread), fame (or glory), and authority -- those all were things Jesus was going to get anyway. What the devil's temptation consisted of was basically short-cuts. Use your power and ability, the things you know how to do, doing things the way you feel comfortable doing them -- do that rather than relying upon God, and what will happen?

Nothing good; you won't get anything you weren't going to get anyway, and the wrong approach will bring disappointment and grief. It's not just that "the slow way is the safe way" (Frank Herbert, Dune), but that God's way is better than going against his way.

Dialectical Biblical Interpretation?

One of the most useful principles I know for understanding and applying the Bible is to ask: "If this is the truth, what is the lie?" From thinking about the lie, we can see more things about the truth. This might sound vaguely like Hegel (or Marx?), but it came in handy as I looked at today's reading from the Psalms:

My soul finds rest in God alone;

my salvation comes from him.

Psalm 62.1

If that's the truth -- that rest for my soul comes only in God, then what's the lie? That rest for my soul (or "salvation") can come from anywhere else.

We believe this kind of thing all the time, you and I. At least a part of us believes it. "I'll be glad when..." and fill in the blank. When I've made $X, when I've had my big break, when I'm famous, when I've met somebody, whatever. Haven't we all thought something like that, at least for a while (before we came to our senses)? It is, of course, a crock. Why are so many celebrities in rehab programs? Why did Howard Hughes meet such an ignoble end? Why are there so many divorces?

Because fortune, achievement, fame, companions aren't powerful enough, or benevolent enough, to bring significance, satisfaction (OK, salvation). But in contrast, if we look down a few lines, we see this:

¹¹One thing God has spoken,

two things have I heard:

that you, O God, are strong,

¹²and that you, O Lord, are loving.

from Psalm 62.11-12

Well, I think the little dialectic "trick" worked; without it, I don't think it would have occurred to me how to tie verses 11-12 with verse 1.

In any case, whenever I'm tempted to think, "I'll be happy when..." (or "My life will be complete when..." or some variation) -- when I catch myself thinking those kinds of things, this psalm is a good reminder to wake up and come back to reality. Because none of those things are strong and loving enough; they aren't powerful and good enough -- to bring peace and hope. But the good news is that God is, and he will, and he's available when we call on him.

What Important Things Happened Today?

Today's New Testament reading, from Luke 3, makes me think about the first Christian conference I ever attended. Here's the passage:

¹In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar--when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene-- ²during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert.

Luke 3:1-2

The speaker started off his message (I think it was the first one of the conference) by commenting on the news, or rather the lack thereof. He hadn't seen the Huntley-Brinkley report or Cronkite's summary of the day's events; he hadn't picked up the New York Times. "But I can guarantee you this," he said. "Nowhere did they say anything about a few hundred men and women gathered at Redwood Christian Park."

In the 1^st century A.D., the stuff on the evening news wasn't the stuff God thought important. Why does Luke bother to name Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, and all the rest here? They're only to tell us when the Important Event happened. What important event? That the word of God came to an obscure prophet in an unnamed place in the desert.

Thinking back on that conference, in the last quarter of the 20^th century, I don't recall what the Important People were doing. But I'm going to guess that when those dates are discussed in heaven, at least some of the significant events in the kingdom of God are going to turn out to be some decisions made by unknown people at an obscure campground in the hills.

One thing that happened to me as a result of that conference was that I began to wish that I could make connections between, say, the revelation of Jesus's power on one hand, and Peter's sermons on the other. That as I read the Bible, I could see beyond the events and the sentences that were presented there -- that God would give me insights about what he was trying to say, and how my life should change as a result. Looking back, I can honestly say that that conference changed my life.

And what Important Events happened today? Most of what we see on the news won't be remembered a few years from now. But if God speaks to you or to me in a new way today -- or if we hear him in a new way; if his spirit stirs in us a new desire; if by our prayers, someone takes the next step closer to God; if any of those things happen, that will be remembered in heaven, and who was president or governor will be mentioned, if they're mentioned at all, only so that people will know when the Important Event happened.

Personal growth

Some years, ah, some decades ago, I was advised to set goals for personal growth in four areas, based on Luke 2:52, which appears in today's New Testament reading:

And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and with man.

The four areas were: intellectual (or something like that), physical, spiritual, social. These weren't all literally growth goals (how much weight do you plan to gain? for example), but goals/desires for my life in these areas.

As I think back on those goals, or those desires, it seems to me that I have much to be thankful for. Intellectually? I now regularly read and think about subjects that I formerly had no interest in. Physically? I don't do as much exercise as some experts say we should, but then I only have 24 hours in a day, and I am in reasonable shape. On the spiritual front, the Lord has protected me from going totally off the rails, although I don't think I'm as much of a Bible scholar, or an evangelist, as I had once hoped I'd become. And the most important aspect of my social life, the desire for a wife and children, has been granted beyond my expectations or any reasonable hope.

But let's take another look at the verse. I can see how Jesus could grow physically and in favor with man, but wisdom? Didn't he already know everything? And how about that "favor with God" part -- how could Jesus have had less favor with God earlier (in order to grow in favor with God over time)?

Well, I don't have a completely satisfactory answer, but I think I've heard something along these lines. In the process of living life, of having experiences, something happens to us humans besides what we "learn" from them. You've heard so-and-so described as a "seasoned" {therapist, counselor, pastor, executive, writer, _______}. It doesn't just mean that they're smart, or wise, or excellent; it says something else. What? I'm not sure exactly.

Let me take another run at this. When Jesus was twelve years old, how long had he been walking, in the flesh? A little under twelve years, right? So how long had he been walking in the flesh with God? Something under twelve years. Now, at age thirty, how long had he been walking in the flesh with God? Quite a bit longer. If someone's been walking with you for years and years, for decades, there's something that develops, there's something to the relationship that wasn't there earlier. For us, we learn things we didn't know before, but God knows the end from the beginning. And yet, I think there's something besides "just the facts" that we learn -- there's something else, something that requires longevity in a relationship. Because although God is unlike us in his omniscience and omnipotence and omnipresence and all that kind of thing, he is like us (or rather we are like him) in that we feel affection for others, as God does; we get exasperated (more quickly than he does). We are like him in our emotional lives.

And whatever it is besides "just the facts" that we get from the longevity of a relationship, I think it's a sort of shadow of what God gets from long-lasting relationships.

So that's the "favor with God" part. As far as how Jesus could grow in wisdom, I don't quite get that. But I think there's something about the experience of dealing with the limitations of the flesh -- an experience he had not had before coming to earth. And as he acquired more experience, I think there is something that he gained from those years of experience, that there's some way he grew in wisdom over those decades.

And what are my goals for the next few decades? Wisdom, stature (or in my case maybe it should be "cardio-vascular health"), favor with God, favor with man? What are yours?

These may be worth a discussion of some kind, maybe with a small group? Or at least some thought. Where did I come from, how far have I come, where is God taking me?

Bias and bias...

Today's new Testament reading is the nativity story, recited annually on millions of American TV sets in A Charlie Brown Christmas by the "Linus van Pelt" character:

¹In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. ²(This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) ³And everyone went to his own town to register. ⁴So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David.

Luke 2.1-4

Schulz's character recited it out of the old King James version, which reads "...that all the world should be taxed," which likely was the purpose of the census.

Now I have to say something about anti-Christian bias in the academy here. For many years, students were told that no census was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. They may have been told that Quirinius wasn't governor at the time of Christ's birth (I'm not too sure about that one).

On what basis did they say that? Well, they were aware that Quirinius was governor during a certain period, and they had not found any sign of a census during that period. Do you see the flaws? There are two of them:

• I haven't found a sign of it, therefore it didn't happen."
  Which is wrong because the next dig might find it!
• I know of one period when Quirinius was governor, and he could not have been governor any other time.
  I may be mistaken, but I believe that governors have served non-consecutive terms in these United States in the 20^th century A.D.; why not in Syria in the 1^st century B.C.?

You've probably guessed it by now: Quirinius was governor when Jesus was born, in a non-consecutive term; and records of a census were found during that term.

All this was old news in 1960, yet in the late 1970s, Stanford students were told that Luke was wrong because there was no census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria...

An anti-Christian bias? An anti-Biblical bias?

Well, God is biased too. A few lines down, we read:

⁸And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. ⁹An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. ¹⁰But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. ¹¹Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord.

This was good news for all the people -- not good news for some people that's bad news for other people (good news for Toyota being bad news for GM, for example). So that's not where the bias is.

Who's receiving the message? That's where the bias is! God gives this great news to shepherds. These are people whose testimony was not accepted in a court of law. These are people who don't normally live near town because the townspeople can't stand the smell.

(By the way, I once heard that Jesus was probably born in the spring, near the time of Passover, when the demand for lambs was very high in town -- this would be the only time, so I was told, that shepherds would be nearby.)

Witnesses to the birth of Christ the Lord -- domestic animals; and people whose testimony wasn't admissible in a court of law. Come to think of it, who were the first to know that Jesus had risen from the dead? Another set of people whose testimony wasn't admissible in a court of law -- women.

Bias indeed!

In which direction do my biases tend?

posted 3/17

His Name is John

Zechariah the priest had been struck dumb for some nine months because he didn't believe the angel. Today's New Testament reading takes place after his son is born.

⁵⁹On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him after his father Zechariah, ⁶⁰but his mother spoke up and said, "No! He is to be called John."

⁶¹They said to her, "There is no one among your relatives who has that name." ⁶²Then they made signs to his father, to find out what he would like to name the child. ⁶³He asked for a writing tablet, and to everyone's astonishment he wrote, "His name is John."

Luke 1.59-62

Why is this conversation recorded? Elizabeth telling everyone the name, Zechariah writing it down, everybody else being shocked -- what's that all about? Here are a few things that strike me as unusual.

• "They" didn't believe Elizabeth -- why?
• They made signs to Zechariah; was he deaf, too? And if he were, why would they make signs, rather than writing something? What was the literacy rate I wonder?
• Someone pointed out to me once that this suggests Elizabeth could read and write. Whatever the literacy rate was for the population in general, I guess it was lower for women.
• Nobody else knew that Elizabeth could read?

Apparently Zech and Liz were more educated (i.e., able to read and write) than the "they" being described here.

Here's what I think about this: I think Zech and Liz were ahead of their time. It seems to me that Zech honored Liz; they had a level of communication, maybe intimacy, beyond the usual. I mean, she could read his writing, he obviously talked her into bed (without using his voice). But seriously, the bottom line is that she was an honored person in his life; she knew things that nobody knew she knew.

I think this is a great example to follow. If the two are to become "one flesh," then it's an honor for my spouse to know things nobody else knows -- or knows that she knows. Likewise it's an honor when my spouse tells me things that nobody else knows -- or knows I know. So I guess what I take from this is, it's a good thing to give and receive honor, back and forth, with my wife. May we pursue this and guard it against intruders.

written 3/15, posted 3/17

Balaam and the Bad Rap

In today's Old Testament reading, from Numbers 22, the Israelites traveled through the desert and came near to the territory of Moab. The Moabite king, Balak, sent for Balaam to put a curse on the Israelite people, because they were too numerous for him to defeat. Balaam has the messengers spend the night, and during the night he tells God what's up with the visitors.

¹²But God said to Balaam, "Do not go with them. You must not put a curse on those people, because they are blessed."

Numbers 22:12

Balaam has his instructions. What does he do with them?

¹³The next morning Balaam got up and said to Balak's princes, "Go back to your own country, for the Lord has refused to let me go with you."

Numbers 22:12

Balak sends more messengers, more distinguished and more numerous than the first, and he promises a handsome reward.

¹⁸But Balaam answered them, "Even if Balak gave me his palace filled with silver and gold, I could not do anything great or small to go beyond the command of the Lord my God.

Numbers 22:18

Here is a guy who knew where he stood. And as such he provides us with an example to follow.

So let's stop right there for a moment. Are you thinking about doing something rather shabby, something you know you shouldn't? Cheating on your expense report, on your spouse, or something like that? There's a whole pile of trouble you and I can avoid by just determining, like Balaam did (or said he did) not to go beyond what the Lord your God permits.

At this point, we could continue reading and try to figure out where Balaam got into trouble (because get into trouble he did), but I'm not going to do that, basically because I'd be making stuff up. The good news for us, though, is that whatever trouble we do get into, there is grace and mercy available for us.