For this blog, I am deviating from my normal theme of ethnic diversity in the church (mostly), but because it is Holy Week, and because these thoughts have been on my mind, I feel compelled to write about them.
Two years ago, the Presbyterian Church (USA) wanted to change the words to a verse of Keith Getty's and Stuart Townend's modern hymn classic, "In Christ Alone," before they included it in their new hymnal. The line the church was tripping over was in verse two: "Til on that cross where Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied..." That concept was abhorrent to these church leaders, and they wanted to change it to "Til on that cross where Jesus died, the love of God was magnified." The hymn authors would not allow the change, so the church dropped the song from their hymnal. In light of recent events with this denomination, their reaction is perfectly consistent.
What's the problem? There are many today who cannot embrace the idea of penal substitution - that on the cross, Christ offered propitiation for our sins. This is a New Testament word and concept that even some modern translations, including the vaunted NIV, felt it necessary to change to "atoning sacrifice." But the idea of propitiation is found in more than one place in Scripture. It speaks of the idea of "turning away wrath," just as the Getty-Townend hymn suggests.
While it is true that there is more than one aspect of Christ's death on the cross during those six hours on Golgotha, (John R.W. Stott's The Cross of Christ handles this masterfully) it is also true that penal substitution is a key and central focus. And yet, many Christians want to shrink from it today. Because they cannot contemplate a God whose wrath would need to be satisfied, they find it easier to ignore or deny this element of Calvary.
I fear that we have taken our sin too lightly. Because we are beginning to lessen the radical depravity of our nature (radical in the classical sense of being to the root of our being), we also feel it necessary to belittle the idea of such a radical solution to our problem. Sin is nothing less than cosmic treason against our Creator, and it must be dealt with by extreme measures. We are not all as bad as we can be, but we are all as bad off as we can be. "Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness." (Hebrews 9:22) God hates sin, and the only solution is blood which represents the life of the sacrifice. (Leviticus 17:11) All the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament era could cover for sin, but they could not take it away. "It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." (Hebrews 10:4) Only the sacrifice of a perfect Lamb could do that, and this is what all of these sacrifices were pointing to, until one day, by the Jordan River, John the Baptist pointed to his cousin in the flesh and said, "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." (John 1:29). "But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God." (Hebrews 10:12)
So where do we find penal substitution in the Bible? The clearest passage, I think, is in the Old Testament, in Isaiah 53:5. "He was pierced ... crushed ... punished ... wounded." That is penal. "For our transgressions ... for our iniquities ... for our peace ... for our healing." That is substitution.
"But I thought Jesus died mainly as an example of love." Partly, He did. Yet in the New Testament, when this or any other aspect of the cross is mentioned, it is generally connected to penal substitution. Two examples: First, 1 Peter 2:21-23 speaks about being called to His example of non-retaliation in the face of suffering. But this is immediately followed with these words: "He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; 'by His wounds you have been healed.'" (1 Peter 2:24). Second, Colossians 2:15 refers to the Christus Victor aspect of the atonement. "And having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross." But just prior to this, in verses 13-14, Paul writes, "He forgave all our sins, having cancelled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; He has taken it away, nailing it to the cross." You simply cannot take penal substitution out of the equation. It is why Jesus was abandoned by His Father for three hours on the cross, when the world turned the darkest it has ever been. The wrath of God came upon Jesus as He died in our place. God's wrath is found in His turning away from us because of our sin. This is the cup Jesus recoiled from drinking in Gethsemane, not all the physical suffering He would endure. He knew that all of that was coming. But in the final moment, when he contemplated separation from His Father (on ouir behalf), He struggled intensely. But then, those magnificent words, "Not my will, but Yours be done." From that moment of sublime surrender, Jesus remained calm and serene while His enemies were going crazy with hatred, rage, and fear.
Dr. R. C. Sproul suggests that if the great blessing of God is that He "bless you and keep you ... and make His face shine on you ... and turn His face toward you and give you peace," (Numbers 6:24-26), then the curse of God would be the opposite - which is why Jesus prayed the one prayer of His life where he did not address God as 'Father." "My God, my God, why have you forsaken Me?" (Mark 15:34). This is why Galatians 3:13 says, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.'"
So if God's wrath had to be satisfied to save us from our sins, then that must mean that God is a vengeful and angry Father who had to be appeased by the intervention of His loving Son. No! That would be a blasphemy to believe. Who initiated our salvation? Scripture is clear. The capitalization of "God" is my emphasis.
"GOD so loved the world that he gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him would not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
"This man was handed over to you by GOD'S deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross." (Acts 2:23)
"Yet it was (YAHWEH'S) will to crush Him and cause Him to suffer..." (Isaiah 53:10)
"He (GOD) who did not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for us all - how will He not also, along with Him, graciously give us all things?" (Romans 8:32)
"...that GOD was in Christ, reconciling the world to Hinmself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them..." (2 Corinthians 5:19)
God loved you so much that He conceived the only way that there was to bring us back. A sinless substitute was needed - and Jesus stepped forward to take His role, to die and bear God's wrath against sin in our place. That is how bad our sin is. Until we get that, this will not make sense to us.
Today, Brian McClaren and other emergent and liberal theolgians have promoted the idea that the concept of penal substituion is nothing more than "cosmic child abuse." I thought about that. They would be correct IF there were any other way to God. If you could also come by being moral and ethical or by works of compassion, or by transcendental meditation, or by fasting for Ramadan, then yes, this would be child abuse, because it would be pointless. Imagine God the Father saying to God the Son, "Listen. I need you to go down and become a man and suffer unimaginable torture and abuse at the hands of wicked men and then be abandoned by Me for a time as you bear their sins, so that those who choose to trust in this can come to heaven. But of course, they can also come a myriad of other ways, because I just love them all, and so they all get in." Ridiculous! and blasphemous!
Jesus said there is only one way through Him (John 14:6) and so did the apostles who gave their lives for this gospel (Acts 4:12). So this is not child abuse. This is the greatest gift God could offer, because He is under no obligation at all to forgive us, unless He so chooses - but oh, there is a great cost to forgiveness. And this Holy Week, we'd better remember this. Eternal life really does depend on it.
We don't sing hymns about the cross like there used to be. Instead. we get upset about one line from a new hymn that offends us. Shame on us! In 1804, Thomas Kelly, an Anglican priest who later became a "dissenter" wrote one of over 750 hymns he composed in his lifetime. This one, entitled "Stricken, Smitten, and Afflicted," has been recorded by Fernando Ortega. They don't write them like this anymore, because we don't like to be reminded of our great need. But let these words sink in, especially on this coming Good Friday.
Stricken, smitten, and afflicted, see Him dying on the tree!
'Tis the Christ by man rejected, yes, my soul, 'tis He, 'tis He!
'Tis the long expected Prophet, David's Son, yet David's Lord,
By His Son God now has spoken, 'tis the true and faithful Word.
Tell me, ye who hear Him groaning, was there ever grief like His?
Friends thru fear His cause disowning, foes insulting His distress;
Many hands were raised to wound Him, none would interpose to save;
But the deepest stroke that pierced Him was the stroke that Justice gave.
Ye who think of sin by lightly, nor suppose the evil great
Here may view its nature rightly, here its guilt may estimate;
Mark the sacrifice appointed, see who bears the awful load,
'Tis the Word, the Lord's Anointed, Son of Man and Son of God.
Here we have a firm foundation, here the refuge of the lost,
Christ's the Rock of our Salvation, His the name of which we boast;
Lamb of God, for sinners wounded, sacrifice to cancel guilt,
None shall ever be confounded who on Him their hope have built.
In closing, may I reminde you that this message is for everyone on planet earth - because the vision of Revelation 7:9-10 is this: "After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb; they were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. And they cried out in a loud voice: 'Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb."
Praise the Lamb of God who died in my place. He is my only hope, my only merit, my only righteousness. Nothing in my hand I bring, simply to Thy cross I cling. Sola Deo Gloria!
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
The Mission Mandate of Worship
What is the driving force of mission? It's commanded? True. Jesus means so much to us? Of course. People are lost without Him. Yes. But is there an even greater motivation? The most basic belief we have about God is that there is one God, and only one. The Jewish shema says this clearly in Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel. The LORD our God, the LORD is one." Jesus prefaces His Great Commandment with these words.
Australian Anglican John Dickson points out in his great book on evangelism in the church, The Best Kept Secret of Chrisrian Mission, that monotheism has everything to do with mission because if this is so, then everyone has an obligation to worship the one God.
Psalm 96, written to the Jews, calls for the whole earth to praise the one true God, and it starts right out of the gate in verse 1:
"Sing to the LORD a new song. sing to the LORD, all the earth."
But how will this happen? Only when God's people spread the Word about Him. So the Psalmist goes on in verse 3 to say:
"Declare His glory among the nations, His marvelous deeds among all peoples." And one primary way we do this is in our corporate worship.
"Ascribe to the LORD, all you families of nations, ascribe to the LORD glory and strength. Ascrive to the LORD the glory due His name; bring an offering and come into His courts. Worship the LORD in the splendor of His holiness; tremble before Him, all the earth. Say among the nations, 'The LORD reigns!'" (verses 7-10)
Notice the elements of worship included in these verses: praise and adoration, the presenting of offerings, and proclamation/testimony. The Psalm ends by stating that ultimately, the goal is for the entire creation to worship God, but it begins with the peoples of the earth.
So again, we have evidence that God's plan was always to have His people comprised of all nations, not just the Jews. He called out this small nation for this very purpose. The tragedy is that, for the most part, the Jewish people neglected or ignored this mandate. They either practiced syncretism and attempted to blend the one God in with all the other "gods" of the earth who were not really gods at all. Or they went to the opposite extreme (after the return from exile) and shut the nations out of their "chosen people" status.
But it can be documented that, at times in their history, the Jews sought to obey this mandate. If only they had stayed with it and taken it more seriously. But it is not for us to point out their flaws but rather, to examine our own practices.
The atmosphere of this Psalm is public worship within earshot of the nations. Today the churches here in the United States, almost without exception, meet within earshot of the nations, because the nations have come here.
We who have discovered that the one true God is actually one God in three Persons need to be aware of the presence of the nations around us and take seriously the command to declare His glory among them. This means we watch for them, we invite them, we seek to be culturally sensitive to them, we celebrate each advance of ethnic diversity within our churches, we disciple them into full membership and, when possible, leadership.
If nothing else, it means we pray for life to come into our worship services. A.W. Tozer wrote:
One hundred religious persons knit into a unity by careful organization do not constitute a church any more than eleven dead men make a football teram. The first requisite is life, always.
I'm not talking about style, but atmosphere and attitude. Life can happen in liturgical churches with robes and candles, and in casual worship with bands and screens. Or not. The choice is ours. But if it's real, and there is true joy, contrition, adoration and awe, and the message is biblical understandable, guess what?
"...they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, 'God is really among you!'" (1 Corinthians 14:25) This is what it means to ascribe glory to the one true God in earshot of the nations. Worship planning groups, pastors, worship leaders, instrumentalists and singers, and all members - this is part of your mission mandate. It can still happen on Sunday morning - if you'll let it. Don't let your worship be about you, and how you do things, and how you've always done things, and what will please Brother Sam or Sister Edna. Let it be about the one true God and what will reach the nations for that one true God, displayed in Jesus Christ, His Son, and revealed by the Holy Spirit. Why?
"For great is the LORD and most worthy of praise; He is to be feared above all gods. For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the LORD made the heavens. Splendor and majesty are before Him; strength and glory are in His sanctuary." (Psalm 96:4-6)
When it's truly about Him, it will truly be for everyone.
Australian Anglican John Dickson points out in his great book on evangelism in the church, The Best Kept Secret of Chrisrian Mission, that monotheism has everything to do with mission because if this is so, then everyone has an obligation to worship the one God.
Psalm 96, written to the Jews, calls for the whole earth to praise the one true God, and it starts right out of the gate in verse 1:
"Sing to the LORD a new song. sing to the LORD, all the earth."
But how will this happen? Only when God's people spread the Word about Him. So the Psalmist goes on in verse 3 to say:
"Declare His glory among the nations, His marvelous deeds among all peoples." And one primary way we do this is in our corporate worship.
"Ascribe to the LORD, all you families of nations, ascribe to the LORD glory and strength. Ascrive to the LORD the glory due His name; bring an offering and come into His courts. Worship the LORD in the splendor of His holiness; tremble before Him, all the earth. Say among the nations, 'The LORD reigns!'" (verses 7-10)
Notice the elements of worship included in these verses: praise and adoration, the presenting of offerings, and proclamation/testimony. The Psalm ends by stating that ultimately, the goal is for the entire creation to worship God, but it begins with the peoples of the earth.
So again, we have evidence that God's plan was always to have His people comprised of all nations, not just the Jews. He called out this small nation for this very purpose. The tragedy is that, for the most part, the Jewish people neglected or ignored this mandate. They either practiced syncretism and attempted to blend the one God in with all the other "gods" of the earth who were not really gods at all. Or they went to the opposite extreme (after the return from exile) and shut the nations out of their "chosen people" status.
But it can be documented that, at times in their history, the Jews sought to obey this mandate. If only they had stayed with it and taken it more seriously. But it is not for us to point out their flaws but rather, to examine our own practices.
The atmosphere of this Psalm is public worship within earshot of the nations. Today the churches here in the United States, almost without exception, meet within earshot of the nations, because the nations have come here.
We who have discovered that the one true God is actually one God in three Persons need to be aware of the presence of the nations around us and take seriously the command to declare His glory among them. This means we watch for them, we invite them, we seek to be culturally sensitive to them, we celebrate each advance of ethnic diversity within our churches, we disciple them into full membership and, when possible, leadership.
If nothing else, it means we pray for life to come into our worship services. A.W. Tozer wrote:
One hundred religious persons knit into a unity by careful organization do not constitute a church any more than eleven dead men make a football teram. The first requisite is life, always.
I'm not talking about style, but atmosphere and attitude. Life can happen in liturgical churches with robes and candles, and in casual worship with bands and screens. Or not. The choice is ours. But if it's real, and there is true joy, contrition, adoration and awe, and the message is biblical understandable, guess what?
"...they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, 'God is really among you!'" (1 Corinthians 14:25) This is what it means to ascribe glory to the one true God in earshot of the nations. Worship planning groups, pastors, worship leaders, instrumentalists and singers, and all members - this is part of your mission mandate. It can still happen on Sunday morning - if you'll let it. Don't let your worship be about you, and how you do things, and how you've always done things, and what will please Brother Sam or Sister Edna. Let it be about the one true God and what will reach the nations for that one true God, displayed in Jesus Christ, His Son, and revealed by the Holy Spirit. Why?
"For great is the LORD and most worthy of praise; He is to be feared above all gods. For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the LORD made the heavens. Splendor and majesty are before Him; strength and glory are in His sanctuary." (Psalm 96:4-6)
When it's truly about Him, it will truly be for everyone.
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Image Bearers
One of the basic tenets of this ministry is that there really are no such thing as races, only ethnicities, nationalities, cultures. But there is one race, the human race. I was pleased to see that noted pastor and author David Platt agrees with me. In his newest book, which I am reading now, entitled, A Compassionate Call to Counter Culture, he addresses many current issues from a Christian perspective. One of those issues is ethnic diversity. (I confess, I jumped ahead some chapters to see what he had to say.)
Platt suggests that in this day of so much conversation about race, so much of it divisive, the church needs to change the conversation itself by pointing out that the Bible does not make distinctions based on race. If it did, we would have to ask the question, "What race were Adam and Eve?" Platt responds, "The answer is both obvious and simple: the human race."
Then we might ask, "No, we meant, what color were they?" Now we have two problems according to the author. First, we don't know because the Bible doesn't tell us. While we have pictured them traditionally as being white, we have no basis for that at all. For all we know, they were any one of a multitude of colors - or they may have been different colors. That first marriage in Eden may have been an intercultural one. The greater possibility is that they were dark. But the point is, we think and talk about them in terms the Bible does not use. Second, the Bible doesn't tell us what color they were because God does not equate membership in the human race with skin tone.
We all have the same roots, we are all part of the same race.
When we talk about "races," says Platt, we undercut our unity in the human race. This he calls a gospel-less starting point. It's far more helpful to see that the Bible grounds our understanding of human diversity in human ethnicity. As Platt puts it, "To use the language of Genesis 10, we comprise 'clans' in separate 'nations' that speak different 'languages' in diverse 'lands.' And with the globalization of the world and the migration of men and women across continents and into cities, these clans from separate nations and with different languages now often live in the same land."
At least in the church, especially in the church, we need to change our categories to show a better way. One of our theme verses is Acts 17:26: "From one man He made all the nations..." Every one of us can trace his or her ancestry back to one family, the family of Noah, in Genesis 10-11, and beyond that, to one man and woman in the Garden.
Several lessons can be gleaned from this. One is that if Adam and Eve were made in the image and likeness of God, as they were, then every one of their descendants has that same image and likeness in them. At the very least, it means that we are to treat every other person with dignity We are not all brothers and sisters in Christ (that requires faith in Him and repentance), but we are all brothers and sisters in the human race. So it is natural that Jesus would teach us to "do to others what you would have them do to you." (Matthew 7:12). We would all like to be treated with dignity and respect, even by those who may disagree with us. We have the best reason of all to do this, the theological one: every person we know, every person we pass on the street, every person we have contact with, is an image bearer.
Second, the gospel announces the Good News that among the things the Cross accomplished is the breaking down of barriers between human beings (Ephesians 2:11-22). It is important to think about the vertical cross beam that points to heaven. Reconcilation to God is fundamental. We are ambassadors for Christ, pleading with others to be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:18-20) But we cannot forget that horizontal cross beam. We work to bring persons into a new family made up of all peoples, tribes, nations, and languages. This is part of that new creation Paul spoke of in 2 Corinthians 5:17. It's not just each of us as individuals who are made new, but we are made new as a people. Paul would look at the church today and be shocked at how segregated we allow ourselves to be. And I am not only speaking to white churches. He would say, "If I could bring Jews and Gentiles together into one body, what are you waiting for?"
Finally, though not exhaustively, if we are all image bearers, then we also share the sin of Adam in us, so we all have the same great need. Our biggest problem is not social injustice or poverty, bad as they are. These are symptoms. Sin is the disease we share in common, and there is only one cure. The cross of Jesus Christ, where He bore our sins and from where He offers us His righteousness so that we can have the hope of standing before a holy God and gaining entrance to eternal life. Whatever your nationality, your ethnicity, your skin color, your religion, your socio-economic status, you need Jesus. More than anything else, I pray that this ministry will lead more of you to Him. But if it doesn't, I will still treat you with the dignity you deserve - because you are an image bearer.
Platt suggests that in this day of so much conversation about race, so much of it divisive, the church needs to change the conversation itself by pointing out that the Bible does not make distinctions based on race. If it did, we would have to ask the question, "What race were Adam and Eve?" Platt responds, "The answer is both obvious and simple: the human race."
Then we might ask, "No, we meant, what color were they?" Now we have two problems according to the author. First, we don't know because the Bible doesn't tell us. While we have pictured them traditionally as being white, we have no basis for that at all. For all we know, they were any one of a multitude of colors - or they may have been different colors. That first marriage in Eden may have been an intercultural one. The greater possibility is that they were dark. But the point is, we think and talk about them in terms the Bible does not use. Second, the Bible doesn't tell us what color they were because God does not equate membership in the human race with skin tone.
We all have the same roots, we are all part of the same race.
When we talk about "races," says Platt, we undercut our unity in the human race. This he calls a gospel-less starting point. It's far more helpful to see that the Bible grounds our understanding of human diversity in human ethnicity. As Platt puts it, "To use the language of Genesis 10, we comprise 'clans' in separate 'nations' that speak different 'languages' in diverse 'lands.' And with the globalization of the world and the migration of men and women across continents and into cities, these clans from separate nations and with different languages now often live in the same land."
At least in the church, especially in the church, we need to change our categories to show a better way. One of our theme verses is Acts 17:26: "From one man He made all the nations..." Every one of us can trace his or her ancestry back to one family, the family of Noah, in Genesis 10-11, and beyond that, to one man and woman in the Garden.
Several lessons can be gleaned from this. One is that if Adam and Eve were made in the image and likeness of God, as they were, then every one of their descendants has that same image and likeness in them. At the very least, it means that we are to treat every other person with dignity We are not all brothers and sisters in Christ (that requires faith in Him and repentance), but we are all brothers and sisters in the human race. So it is natural that Jesus would teach us to "do to others what you would have them do to you." (Matthew 7:12). We would all like to be treated with dignity and respect, even by those who may disagree with us. We have the best reason of all to do this, the theological one: every person we know, every person we pass on the street, every person we have contact with, is an image bearer.
Second, the gospel announces the Good News that among the things the Cross accomplished is the breaking down of barriers between human beings (Ephesians 2:11-22). It is important to think about the vertical cross beam that points to heaven. Reconcilation to God is fundamental. We are ambassadors for Christ, pleading with others to be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:18-20) But we cannot forget that horizontal cross beam. We work to bring persons into a new family made up of all peoples, tribes, nations, and languages. This is part of that new creation Paul spoke of in 2 Corinthians 5:17. It's not just each of us as individuals who are made new, but we are made new as a people. Paul would look at the church today and be shocked at how segregated we allow ourselves to be. And I am not only speaking to white churches. He would say, "If I could bring Jews and Gentiles together into one body, what are you waiting for?"
Finally, though not exhaustively, if we are all image bearers, then we also share the sin of Adam in us, so we all have the same great need. Our biggest problem is not social injustice or poverty, bad as they are. These are symptoms. Sin is the disease we share in common, and there is only one cure. The cross of Jesus Christ, where He bore our sins and from where He offers us His righteousness so that we can have the hope of standing before a holy God and gaining entrance to eternal life. Whatever your nationality, your ethnicity, your skin color, your religion, your socio-economic status, you need Jesus. More than anything else, I pray that this ministry will lead more of you to Him. But if it doesn't, I will still treat you with the dignity you deserve - because you are an image bearer.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
One of Those "Aha" Moments
You've been there, like me, if you have been reading and studying the Bible for any length of time. You read a passage that you've read dozens, if not hundreds, of times before. You heard the story in Sunday School, you could recite it from memory. But this time, a verse, a phrase, a word jumps out at you like you are really seeing it for the first time - because you are.
That happened to me recently with one of the most familiar accounts in the Old Testament, if not the entire Bible - the story of the Exodus from Egypt.
After all of the plagues, and the stubborn willfulness of Pharaoh, he finally relents when the Lord begins to take the lives of the firstborn sons of Egypt, including Pharaoh's own - just like the previous Pharaoh had taken the lives of the firstborn of the Hebrews - a holocaust from which Moses was spared. So now Pharaoh says, "Go, take the people, take what you will, but leave!" And so the Israelites celebrate their first Passover, because the angel of death had passed over any door with blood from a spotless lamb on its lintels. After eating the meal, the people took more unleavened bread for the journey, plus gold, silver, and jewels from the Egyptians, gathered together and prepared to head to Sinai. And here is where I saw it.
Beginning at Exodus 12:37: "The Israelites journeyed from Rameses ro Sukkoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. (And here it comes, sports fans!) Many other people went up with them, and also large droves of livestock, both flocks and hers." (emphasis mine)
Did you see it? Many other people. The group that left Egypt that day was a mixed group - not just Hebrews. In his fine biblical theology volume from Intervarsity Press entitled From Every People and Nation, African-American theologian J. Daniel Hays, writes:
"Many non-Israelites were integrated into the community of faith." He then quotes Walter Bruggeman, saying, "The phrase suggests that this is no kinship group, no ethnic community, but a great conglomeration of lower class folk." Hays goes on: "Who were these foreigners? Were they Egyptians? Other nationalities? Where did they come from and what were they doing in Egypt?" He then explains how ancient Egyptian records show how Egypt was replete with foreigners during this period, many having been brought back as conquered prisonsers to be slave labor. He concludes, "The group would include both Semitic and non-Semitic peoples." Hays then continues from here to show how Cushites (Black Africans) would have certanly been included in the crowd.
The Jewish nation was never intended to be defined strictly by race. They chose that designation later, but it was not the will of God. Think about it. Where did Abraham, the founder, come from? Ur of the Chaldees (later Babylon, and today, Iran/Iraq). The first Jew was a Gentile!
Besides, this group of ragtag persons was not yet a nation when they left Egypt. That did not happen until Sinai. God's people are never identified ultimately by race or ethnicity. They are identified by covenant! And so it is today. Our identity as the people of God is in the New Covenant ratified by Jesus Christ and sealed with His own blood. This is that covenant prophesied by Jeremiah, which speaks of willingness to follow God's Law because it is on our minds and hearts, of forgiveness of sin, and, most of all, of relationship ("I will be their God, and they will be my people.")
So the next time you teach the Exodus story in your Sunday School class or preach on it from the pulpit, remember not to say that Israel left Egypt, but that a mixed group left Egypt - a group that foreshadows Revelation 7:9, where there will be "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb ... and who "cried out in a loud voice, 'Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.'" (Revelation 7:9-10) This group will have experienced the great Exodus from sin that the first Exodus typifies. Will you be part of that glorious gathering?
That happened to me recently with one of the most familiar accounts in the Old Testament, if not the entire Bible - the story of the Exodus from Egypt.
After all of the plagues, and the stubborn willfulness of Pharaoh, he finally relents when the Lord begins to take the lives of the firstborn sons of Egypt, including Pharaoh's own - just like the previous Pharaoh had taken the lives of the firstborn of the Hebrews - a holocaust from which Moses was spared. So now Pharaoh says, "Go, take the people, take what you will, but leave!" And so the Israelites celebrate their first Passover, because the angel of death had passed over any door with blood from a spotless lamb on its lintels. After eating the meal, the people took more unleavened bread for the journey, plus gold, silver, and jewels from the Egyptians, gathered together and prepared to head to Sinai. And here is where I saw it.
Beginning at Exodus 12:37: "The Israelites journeyed from Rameses ro Sukkoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. (And here it comes, sports fans!) Many other people went up with them, and also large droves of livestock, both flocks and hers." (emphasis mine)
Did you see it? Many other people. The group that left Egypt that day was a mixed group - not just Hebrews. In his fine biblical theology volume from Intervarsity Press entitled From Every People and Nation, African-American theologian J. Daniel Hays, writes:
"Many non-Israelites were integrated into the community of faith." He then quotes Walter Bruggeman, saying, "The phrase suggests that this is no kinship group, no ethnic community, but a great conglomeration of lower class folk." Hays goes on: "Who were these foreigners? Were they Egyptians? Other nationalities? Where did they come from and what were they doing in Egypt?" He then explains how ancient Egyptian records show how Egypt was replete with foreigners during this period, many having been brought back as conquered prisonsers to be slave labor. He concludes, "The group would include both Semitic and non-Semitic peoples." Hays then continues from here to show how Cushites (Black Africans) would have certanly been included in the crowd.
The Jewish nation was never intended to be defined strictly by race. They chose that designation later, but it was not the will of God. Think about it. Where did Abraham, the founder, come from? Ur of the Chaldees (later Babylon, and today, Iran/Iraq). The first Jew was a Gentile!
Besides, this group of ragtag persons was not yet a nation when they left Egypt. That did not happen until Sinai. God's people are never identified ultimately by race or ethnicity. They are identified by covenant! And so it is today. Our identity as the people of God is in the New Covenant ratified by Jesus Christ and sealed with His own blood. This is that covenant prophesied by Jeremiah, which speaks of willingness to follow God's Law because it is on our minds and hearts, of forgiveness of sin, and, most of all, of relationship ("I will be their God, and they will be my people.")
So the next time you teach the Exodus story in your Sunday School class or preach on it from the pulpit, remember not to say that Israel left Egypt, but that a mixed group left Egypt - a group that foreshadows Revelation 7:9, where there will be "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb ... and who "cried out in a loud voice, 'Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.'" (Revelation 7:9-10) This group will have experienced the great Exodus from sin that the first Exodus typifies. Will you be part of that glorious gathering?
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Knots in the Family Tree, Part 4
The final female name in the family line of the Messiah found in Matthew Chapter 1 is that of "Uriah's wife." She is not named, but we know from 1 Samuel 11 and 12 and 1 Kings 1 that this is Bathsheba. Perhaps the very stigma of adultery keeps the text from naming her since Matthew's gospel was being written primarily to a Jewish audience.
Bathsheba is presented to us as an adulteress, and later, as a plotter and a schemer, working to make sure that her son by David is placed on the throne (even though it had already been declared to David to be God's plan).
So in the Jewish mind, she already has two strikes against her to be listed in this or any other genealogy - she is a woman and a sinner. But wait, there's more! It would seem likely that, being married to a Hittite, she was also a Hittite, which would make her, yes - a Gentile (strike 3, yer out!) How about that? Four women in this genealogy - two Canaanites, a Moabite, and a Hittite, not one Jewess.
But God, through Matthew, is saying right from the get-go in Chapter One of the Newer Testament, that some things are going to be different with this Messiah, this God-in-the-flesh, this "Savior, who is Christ, the Lord." Perhaps the biggest new thing that the Jewish people will need to get used to is that God is and always has been interested in more than just Israel. At one time, they knew this (and we'll explore how in future blog posts). But during the years between the return from Exile and now, when God was largely silent, the Jews had gone from being a people who wanted to imitate the nations (the reason they were in Exile in the first place), to a people who wanted to isolate themselves from the nations. In their misguided attempts at reform that started out well under Ezra and Nehemiah, they had quickly gone to drawing a circle around themselves and were determined to keep everyone else out.
But Jesus would have none of this.
Women? Pay attention especially to Luke who includes women a lot in his gospel as supporters of Jesus' ministry and shows Elizabeth and Mary to be heroic in his birth narratives.
Sinners? Again, Luke, but not only Luke, shows Jesus going after the ones Israel had shut out. He is called a glutton and a drunkard and is regularly criticized for eating with sinners ("sinners" meaning anyone who did not try to meticulously keep the law and traditions).But even an adulteress?
Yes, according to John 8, where he tells the woman who was caught, "Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more."
Pardon for sin and a peace that endureth
Thy own presence to cheer and to guide;
Strength for today and bright hope for tomorrow,
Blessings all mine with 10,000 beside.
No condemnation for the past. Strength to go forward into new life in the future. The promise of God to all who trust in Him.
Gentiles? Read Luke 4 again carefully, and see what the people of Nazareth were really so fired up about that they tried to throw Jesus over the nearest cliff. (Hint: it wasn't that He claimed to be the Promised One. That's what I used to think, too.)
So Bathsheba, who had an affair with King David and who stood silent while the king plotted to have her husband conveniently killed on the front lines of battle after David had gotten her pregnant, became the mother of a child who died. Yes, there are consequences to our sins. But the repentant David had the faith to say, "(the child) will not return to me, but I will go to him." He was able to commit the child into the loving arms of God.
Consequences - but also grace. Because God gives this couple a second son, Solomon, who would become the most influential and expansive leader in Israel's history. And because of this, Uriah's wife shows up in the line of Jesus Christ. Amazing grace!
Whatever reason you have to feel like an outsider today, Christmas brings good news. Jesus came for you. Jesus loves you. Jesus will include you, if you come to Him by faith in His finished work on the cross and let Him remake you into a Christlike follower.
As I said last time, I grew up trusting in my own church life and moral goodness and had to have a radical transformation at the age of 19. Since then, I have done more than my share of wrong and faithless things. But I have always trusted in His grace and have never found Him lacking. To God be all the glory. Amen!
Bathsheba is presented to us as an adulteress, and later, as a plotter and a schemer, working to make sure that her son by David is placed on the throne (even though it had already been declared to David to be God's plan).
So in the Jewish mind, she already has two strikes against her to be listed in this or any other genealogy - she is a woman and a sinner. But wait, there's more! It would seem likely that, being married to a Hittite, she was also a Hittite, which would make her, yes - a Gentile (strike 3, yer out!) How about that? Four women in this genealogy - two Canaanites, a Moabite, and a Hittite, not one Jewess.
But God, through Matthew, is saying right from the get-go in Chapter One of the Newer Testament, that some things are going to be different with this Messiah, this God-in-the-flesh, this "Savior, who is Christ, the Lord." Perhaps the biggest new thing that the Jewish people will need to get used to is that God is and always has been interested in more than just Israel. At one time, they knew this (and we'll explore how in future blog posts). But during the years between the return from Exile and now, when God was largely silent, the Jews had gone from being a people who wanted to imitate the nations (the reason they were in Exile in the first place), to a people who wanted to isolate themselves from the nations. In their misguided attempts at reform that started out well under Ezra and Nehemiah, they had quickly gone to drawing a circle around themselves and were determined to keep everyone else out.
But Jesus would have none of this.
Women? Pay attention especially to Luke who includes women a lot in his gospel as supporters of Jesus' ministry and shows Elizabeth and Mary to be heroic in his birth narratives.
Sinners? Again, Luke, but not only Luke, shows Jesus going after the ones Israel had shut out. He is called a glutton and a drunkard and is regularly criticized for eating with sinners ("sinners" meaning anyone who did not try to meticulously keep the law and traditions).But even an adulteress?
Yes, according to John 8, where he tells the woman who was caught, "Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more."
Pardon for sin and a peace that endureth
Thy own presence to cheer and to guide;
Strength for today and bright hope for tomorrow,
Blessings all mine with 10,000 beside.
No condemnation for the past. Strength to go forward into new life in the future. The promise of God to all who trust in Him.
Gentiles? Read Luke 4 again carefully, and see what the people of Nazareth were really so fired up about that they tried to throw Jesus over the nearest cliff. (Hint: it wasn't that He claimed to be the Promised One. That's what I used to think, too.)
So Bathsheba, who had an affair with King David and who stood silent while the king plotted to have her husband conveniently killed on the front lines of battle after David had gotten her pregnant, became the mother of a child who died. Yes, there are consequences to our sins. But the repentant David had the faith to say, "(the child) will not return to me, but I will go to him." He was able to commit the child into the loving arms of God.
Consequences - but also grace. Because God gives this couple a second son, Solomon, who would become the most influential and expansive leader in Israel's history. And because of this, Uriah's wife shows up in the line of Jesus Christ. Amazing grace!
Whatever reason you have to feel like an outsider today, Christmas brings good news. Jesus came for you. Jesus loves you. Jesus will include you, if you come to Him by faith in His finished work on the cross and let Him remake you into a Christlike follower.
As I said last time, I grew up trusting in my own church life and moral goodness and had to have a radical transformation at the age of 19. Since then, I have done more than my share of wrong and faithless things. But I have always trusted in His grace and have never found Him lacking. To God be all the glory. Amen!
Friday, December 19, 2014
Knots in the Family Tree, Part 3
In this post, we will look briefly at the third "knot" in Jesus' family tree, namely Ruth, the Moabitess, and thus, yet another Gentile. Ruth is distinguished by being the most moral of the four women Matthew chose, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to include in his geneaolgy in Chapter 1 of his Gospel.
As we saw last time, Ruth ended up marrying a good man, Boaz, who, it turns out was the son of Rahab, the converted Canaanite prostitute. So even Boaz had non-Jewish blood in him. Evidently, interracial marriages were not necessarily uncommon in those days.
Ruth is heroic for several reasons: (1) her loyalty to Naomi after the deaths of their spouses (we forget that those words used so often at weddings were not originjally spoken to a husband but to a mother-in-law); (2) her humility in following Naomi's counsel and in her respectful attitude toward Boaz; (3) her industry, as she worked hard to gather the gleanings of barley in Boaz' fields. (God would fit in with both major political parties today in that respect - personal responsibility combined with social compassion toward the poor); and (4) her purity, as she did nothing untoward in her approach to Boaz, but followed the custom of the day.
In turn, Boaz sought to win her and to be her kinsman redeemer, which he was able to do successfully. Warren Wiersbe points out how Boaz is, for us, a picture of Jesus Christ, OUR Kinsman Redeemer. Like Boaz, Jesus was't concerned about jeopardizing His own inheritance; instead, He made us a part of HIS inheritance. Also like Boaz, Jesus made His plans privately, but He paid the price publicly; and like Boaz, Jesus did what He did because of His love for His bride - in our case, His multi-colored bride.
Becaue of their determination to become a couple and a family, Ruth from Moab and Boaz, the son of an Israelite and a Canaanite, joined the line of ancestors of our Lord.
But remember, Ruth began as a pagan worshiper and journeyed toward a relationship with the God of Israel. In Chapter 1, Ruth is not even aware that there is a Boaz; in Chapter 2, she is a poor laborer, gleaning in Boaz' fields and receiving his gifts. To her, Boaz is only a wealthy man who is kind to her - kind of like many see God today. The turning point comes in Chapter 3 when Ruth yields herself at Boaz' feet and believes his promises. The result is Chapter 4, where Ruth is no longer a poor laborer. Now she has Boaz and everything he owns belongs to her.
This is the journey of every human being, no matter their culture and ethnicity - from not knowing God to thinking we must work for God and be blessed by Him, to believing Him and what he promises, to being a child and heir of the King.
Whether one is "bad" like Rahab or "good" like Ruth, we all need a Savior. I was one of the "good" ones, growing up in church, and avoiding the common vices of my classmates. But I had to learn that this would not cut it for me. I still needed grace and salvation from my own goodness. I can only trust in the righteousness of Christ.
Pagan families and Abraham's family - both needed redemption. I close with some good words from writer Ann Voskamp.
"...so when we sat around the Christnmas tree tonight, and got to that part tonight in the story of Jesus' family tree and read it: "What someone else meant for bad, God means to make it good." No matter what tries to tear you apart, (sexual sin, war, famine, my words) God holds you heart. No matter what bad was meant to harm you, God's good arms have you. You can stand around your Christmas tree with a family tree as messy as Joseph's, with cheaters and beaters and deceivers, with a family tree like Jacob's, who ran away and ran around and ran folks down - but out of a family that felt like a mess, God brings Jesus, the Messiah. God always brings good out of bad. God always makes hard things into good gifts ... and right then, one kid reached over and squeezed my hand? Sometimes just a moment can feel like all the hard things being turned into a gentle draping of a many-colored grace."
That's my story, too - and I'm sticking to it.
As we saw last time, Ruth ended up marrying a good man, Boaz, who, it turns out was the son of Rahab, the converted Canaanite prostitute. So even Boaz had non-Jewish blood in him. Evidently, interracial marriages were not necessarily uncommon in those days.
Ruth is heroic for several reasons: (1) her loyalty to Naomi after the deaths of their spouses (we forget that those words used so often at weddings were not originjally spoken to a husband but to a mother-in-law); (2) her humility in following Naomi's counsel and in her respectful attitude toward Boaz; (3) her industry, as she worked hard to gather the gleanings of barley in Boaz' fields. (God would fit in with both major political parties today in that respect - personal responsibility combined with social compassion toward the poor); and (4) her purity, as she did nothing untoward in her approach to Boaz, but followed the custom of the day.
In turn, Boaz sought to win her and to be her kinsman redeemer, which he was able to do successfully. Warren Wiersbe points out how Boaz is, for us, a picture of Jesus Christ, OUR Kinsman Redeemer. Like Boaz, Jesus was't concerned about jeopardizing His own inheritance; instead, He made us a part of HIS inheritance. Also like Boaz, Jesus made His plans privately, but He paid the price publicly; and like Boaz, Jesus did what He did because of His love for His bride - in our case, His multi-colored bride.
Becaue of their determination to become a couple and a family, Ruth from Moab and Boaz, the son of an Israelite and a Canaanite, joined the line of ancestors of our Lord.
But remember, Ruth began as a pagan worshiper and journeyed toward a relationship with the God of Israel. In Chapter 1, Ruth is not even aware that there is a Boaz; in Chapter 2, she is a poor laborer, gleaning in Boaz' fields and receiving his gifts. To her, Boaz is only a wealthy man who is kind to her - kind of like many see God today. The turning point comes in Chapter 3 when Ruth yields herself at Boaz' feet and believes his promises. The result is Chapter 4, where Ruth is no longer a poor laborer. Now she has Boaz and everything he owns belongs to her.
This is the journey of every human being, no matter their culture and ethnicity - from not knowing God to thinking we must work for God and be blessed by Him, to believing Him and what he promises, to being a child and heir of the King.
Whether one is "bad" like Rahab or "good" like Ruth, we all need a Savior. I was one of the "good" ones, growing up in church, and avoiding the common vices of my classmates. But I had to learn that this would not cut it for me. I still needed grace and salvation from my own goodness. I can only trust in the righteousness of Christ.
Pagan families and Abraham's family - both needed redemption. I close with some good words from writer Ann Voskamp.
"...so when we sat around the Christnmas tree tonight, and got to that part tonight in the story of Jesus' family tree and read it: "What someone else meant for bad, God means to make it good." No matter what tries to tear you apart, (sexual sin, war, famine, my words) God holds you heart. No matter what bad was meant to harm you, God's good arms have you. You can stand around your Christmas tree with a family tree as messy as Joseph's, with cheaters and beaters and deceivers, with a family tree like Jacob's, who ran away and ran around and ran folks down - but out of a family that felt like a mess, God brings Jesus, the Messiah. God always brings good out of bad. God always makes hard things into good gifts ... and right then, one kid reached over and squeezed my hand? Sometimes just a moment can feel like all the hard things being turned into a gentle draping of a many-colored grace."
That's my story, too - and I'm sticking to it.
.
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Knots in the Family Tree, Part 2
In this post we'll look at another "knot" in Jesus' family tree found in Matthew 1 - Rahab. Her main story is found in Joshua Chapter 2. She is described as a "prostitute." While it is true that in the Hebrew, the term could also mean "innkeeper," the New Testament Greek uses a term for her which can only mean "prostitute." Sort of like with the term "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14. Yes, in Hebrew, it can also be translated "young maiden" (which liberal scholars have had a field day with over the years). The problem is that when the verse is quoted in the New Testament, and when the term is used of Mary, the Greek word, parthenos, can only have one meaning - one who has not had sexual relations with anyone. The Holy Spirit knows whereof He speaks through His Word.
For our purposes, Rahab also represents another Gentile in the family tree, specifically another Canaanite. As we said in the last post, the Canaanites were a very wicked and violent people. In Tamar's case, she had something very bad done to her, and in turn, she retaliated by doing something very bad to Judah. There is no record that she ever converted. She may have, we just don't know.
But with Rahab, we do know. She had heard the stories about the mighty acts of Yahweh long before the spies, "by coincidence," found their way to her. (Joshua 2:8-11) She eviently had chosen to believe in this God. This explains why both Hebrews 11 and James 2 describe her act of hiding the spies and helping them to get back to Joshua as an act of faith. For her work of faith, she and her family were spared when the Israelite army destroyed Jericho after God brought the walls a tumbling down. From that day on, Rahab lived among Israel as a member of the people of God (Joshua 6:25).
So this Canaanite woman in the family line of Jesus can teach us several lessons. First, we believe by hearing. She believed first by hearing the stories of the acts of Yahweh. We believe by hearing the word of God, specifically the message about Christ (Romans 10:17).
Second, Rahab shows how true faith demonstrates itself in works. Her faith led her to do the right thing in protecting the two spies from the Canaanites, who would have tortured and brutally murdered them if they had found them. So why was she not killed with all the other Canaanites? According to Hebrews 11:31, it is because she acted "by faith." Then James weighs in by saying that Rahab was considered righteous for what she did. While it is true that with God we are justified by faith alone in Christ alone, it is also true that in the eyes of the watching world, we are justified by our works. I believe this is the point James is making, which is why he is not at odds with Paul, who would also say that we act out of what we believe in order to "adorn the gospel" or in the NIV, "make the gospel attractive." (Titus 2:10).
Finally, Rahab teaches us that when we come to God, we also come to His people. You can't really have one without the other, although many today seem to be attempting that. If you love Christ, you'll love His bride, too, imperfect as it often is. Augustine of Hippo said it rather crudely. "The church is a whore, but she is my mother." And so, as her descendant and fellow Gentile in Jesus' line, would soon say, "Your people will be my people, and your God my God." (Ruth 1:16).
Lo and behold, this one who was immersed in pagan idolatry and was radically converted to the one true God, and who demonstrated it by her works of faith and who aligned herself for the rest of her days, not only with God, but with His people, married an Israelite by the name of Salmon, and became the mother of Boaz, and thus, the mother-in-law of Ruth, not to mention the great great grandmother of King David. Salmon, hmm? I guess Rahab might be the patrion saint of all those Christians who swim upstream against the current and who march to a different drum.
For our purposes, Rahab also represents another Gentile in the family tree, specifically another Canaanite. As we said in the last post, the Canaanites were a very wicked and violent people. In Tamar's case, she had something very bad done to her, and in turn, she retaliated by doing something very bad to Judah. There is no record that she ever converted. She may have, we just don't know.
But with Rahab, we do know. She had heard the stories about the mighty acts of Yahweh long before the spies, "by coincidence," found their way to her. (Joshua 2:8-11) She eviently had chosen to believe in this God. This explains why both Hebrews 11 and James 2 describe her act of hiding the spies and helping them to get back to Joshua as an act of faith. For her work of faith, she and her family were spared when the Israelite army destroyed Jericho after God brought the walls a tumbling down. From that day on, Rahab lived among Israel as a member of the people of God (Joshua 6:25).
So this Canaanite woman in the family line of Jesus can teach us several lessons. First, we believe by hearing. She believed first by hearing the stories of the acts of Yahweh. We believe by hearing the word of God, specifically the message about Christ (Romans 10:17).
Second, Rahab shows how true faith demonstrates itself in works. Her faith led her to do the right thing in protecting the two spies from the Canaanites, who would have tortured and brutally murdered them if they had found them. So why was she not killed with all the other Canaanites? According to Hebrews 11:31, it is because she acted "by faith." Then James weighs in by saying that Rahab was considered righteous for what she did. While it is true that with God we are justified by faith alone in Christ alone, it is also true that in the eyes of the watching world, we are justified by our works. I believe this is the point James is making, which is why he is not at odds with Paul, who would also say that we act out of what we believe in order to "adorn the gospel" or in the NIV, "make the gospel attractive." (Titus 2:10).
Finally, Rahab teaches us that when we come to God, we also come to His people. You can't really have one without the other, although many today seem to be attempting that. If you love Christ, you'll love His bride, too, imperfect as it often is. Augustine of Hippo said it rather crudely. "The church is a whore, but she is my mother." And so, as her descendant and fellow Gentile in Jesus' line, would soon say, "Your people will be my people, and your God my God." (Ruth 1:16).
Lo and behold, this one who was immersed in pagan idolatry and was radically converted to the one true God, and who demonstrated it by her works of faith and who aligned herself for the rest of her days, not only with God, but with His people, married an Israelite by the name of Salmon, and became the mother of Boaz, and thus, the mother-in-law of Ruth, not to mention the great great grandmother of King David. Salmon, hmm? I guess Rahab might be the patrion saint of all those Christians who swim upstream against the current and who march to a different drum.
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Knots in the Family Tree, Part 1
I want to use Matthew's genealogy in Matthew 1 for the next several posts during this Advent season. I think most of are aware that Matthew includes four women in the genealogy - but not just four women, four unusual women. They are Tamar (verse 3), Rahab (verse 5), Ruth (verse 5), and Bathsheba (verse 6). Now one would think he would want to place some of the more respected matriarchs like Sarah or Rebekah (though they had their problems, too) in this list. Instead, Matthew chooses, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, these four, who are unusual for two reasons: (1)each has some type of scandal attached to them, and (2) (for our purposes) each one has either a Gentile origin or a Gentile connection. This, in itself, would have been shocking for his Jewish readers, who thrived on a racially pure lineage, such as those re-established in Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet Matthew seems to take pains to emphasize the mixed nature of Jesus' lineage on purpose. But
remember, this was God's plan from the very beginning, a multi-ethnic, multi-national people of God (Ephesians 3). It's also the Spirit's purpose through Matthew, since He begins with a genealogy that includes persons from other nations, and then ends the gospel with the call of Jesus for His church to "go and make disciples of all nations." (Matthew 28:19)
One more important note before we go on. I heard Pastor Thabiti Anyabwile make this point several years ago, and it has stuck with me. Matthew begins the family line of Jesus with Abraham. A good Jew, right? Wrong. He came out of Ur of the Chaldees, which became Babylon, and is today, Iraq. So, in Anyabwile's words, "the first Jew was a Gentile!" Think about it. The Jews did not become a people until they came out of Egypt together.
So let's take a look at Tamar. We find her story in Genesis 38. She was a Canaanite. Judah had broken away from his brothers to marry a Canaanite woman (yes, Judah, the one from whom Christ came!). This entire episode is one based in lies and deceit, and as is often the case, Scripture uses a play on words to emphasize it, because the town where this woman bore Judah his third son was named Kezib (or Chezib), which is related to the Hebrew verb, "to tell a lie." Judah chose Tamar (which means "date palm," suggesting a fine figure) for his son. But after the first two sons had died at the hand of God for their sins without Tamar ever conceiving, Judah had promised his third son to her when he had grown to adulthood, a promise Judah did not deliver on. Apparently, Judah chose to place the responsibility for his sons' deaths on Tamar, rather than on God, because he had come to see her as "bad luck." He had shown his true intention when he sent her back to her father's house.
The sordid story continued as Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute to entice her father-in-law to sleep with her so she could bear a child for the family line. Judah had deceived her, so it was payback time. When it was discovered that Tamar was pregnant, Judah decided to have her burned to death, until he discovered that she was pregnant by him. Then he showed some measure of repentance. Like his grandfather before him, Judah became the father of twin boys.
That's where the story ends. Yet Matthew places her in the family tree of Jesus Christ. And not only her, but one of her sons, born of deception, Perez.
There are several lessons here. One is that we are not safe when we separate ourselves from the community, which is what Judah did. We think sometimes, as believers, that we can get along in the world very well without the church. Judah serves as a warning to us that we cannot. There is always the temptation to live like our neighbors instead of as the people of God.
And let's note the continued reaping received from deception. Jacob had used a garment to deceive his father, Isaac, and Judah and his brothers had used Joseph's garment to deceive their father into believing his beloved son was dead. Now Tamar used a garment to deceive Judah (Genesis 38:14).
But over and above this all, the lesson is one of grace. Yes, God disapproves of our sin, and sometimes we pay the highest price for it (like Tamar's first two husbands). Yet despite their imperfections, God used these folks to accomplish his purposes, including the provision of a family line for the Messiah, the One who would come to "save His people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21). God truly takes the weak things of this world to shame the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27). I stand as Exhibit A. I like these words of Victor Hamilton:
"Each of these four women had a highly irregular and potentially scandalous marital union. Nevertheless, these unions were, by God's providence, links in the chain to the Messiah. Accordingly, each of them prepares the way for Mary, whose marital situation is also peculiar, given the fact that she is pregnant but has not yet had sexual relations with her betrothed husband, Joseph. Thus the inclusion of the likes of Tamar in this family tree on one hand foreshadows the circumstances of the birth of Christ, and on the other hand blunts any attack on Mary. God had worked His will in the midst of whispers of scandal." (The Book of Genesis, Chapters 18-50, p.455-456)
Yet again, for our purposes, let us not forget that Tamar was also a Canaanite, not only a Gentile, but a person belonging to a nation of particularly wicked Gentiles. Yet here she is in the family tree. Let's thank God this Advent season for the One who came into the world from the Father, "full of grace and truth." (John 1:14). And let's keep on dreaming of that church that is made up of all nations and looks a lot like the church that is, even now, in heaven.
remember, this was God's plan from the very beginning, a multi-ethnic, multi-national people of God (Ephesians 3). It's also the Spirit's purpose through Matthew, since He begins with a genealogy that includes persons from other nations, and then ends the gospel with the call of Jesus for His church to "go and make disciples of all nations." (Matthew 28:19)
One more important note before we go on. I heard Pastor Thabiti Anyabwile make this point several years ago, and it has stuck with me. Matthew begins the family line of Jesus with Abraham. A good Jew, right? Wrong. He came out of Ur of the Chaldees, which became Babylon, and is today, Iraq. So, in Anyabwile's words, "the first Jew was a Gentile!" Think about it. The Jews did not become a people until they came out of Egypt together.
So let's take a look at Tamar. We find her story in Genesis 38. She was a Canaanite. Judah had broken away from his brothers to marry a Canaanite woman (yes, Judah, the one from whom Christ came!). This entire episode is one based in lies and deceit, and as is often the case, Scripture uses a play on words to emphasize it, because the town where this woman bore Judah his third son was named Kezib (or Chezib), which is related to the Hebrew verb, "to tell a lie." Judah chose Tamar (which means "date palm," suggesting a fine figure) for his son. But after the first two sons had died at the hand of God for their sins without Tamar ever conceiving, Judah had promised his third son to her when he had grown to adulthood, a promise Judah did not deliver on. Apparently, Judah chose to place the responsibility for his sons' deaths on Tamar, rather than on God, because he had come to see her as "bad luck." He had shown his true intention when he sent her back to her father's house.
The sordid story continued as Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute to entice her father-in-law to sleep with her so she could bear a child for the family line. Judah had deceived her, so it was payback time. When it was discovered that Tamar was pregnant, Judah decided to have her burned to death, until he discovered that she was pregnant by him. Then he showed some measure of repentance. Like his grandfather before him, Judah became the father of twin boys.
That's where the story ends. Yet Matthew places her in the family tree of Jesus Christ. And not only her, but one of her sons, born of deception, Perez.
There are several lessons here. One is that we are not safe when we separate ourselves from the community, which is what Judah did. We think sometimes, as believers, that we can get along in the world very well without the church. Judah serves as a warning to us that we cannot. There is always the temptation to live like our neighbors instead of as the people of God.
And let's note the continued reaping received from deception. Jacob had used a garment to deceive his father, Isaac, and Judah and his brothers had used Joseph's garment to deceive their father into believing his beloved son was dead. Now Tamar used a garment to deceive Judah (Genesis 38:14).
But over and above this all, the lesson is one of grace. Yes, God disapproves of our sin, and sometimes we pay the highest price for it (like Tamar's first two husbands). Yet despite their imperfections, God used these folks to accomplish his purposes, including the provision of a family line for the Messiah, the One who would come to "save His people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21). God truly takes the weak things of this world to shame the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27). I stand as Exhibit A. I like these words of Victor Hamilton:
"Each of these four women had a highly irregular and potentially scandalous marital union. Nevertheless, these unions were, by God's providence, links in the chain to the Messiah. Accordingly, each of them prepares the way for Mary, whose marital situation is also peculiar, given the fact that she is pregnant but has not yet had sexual relations with her betrothed husband, Joseph. Thus the inclusion of the likes of Tamar in this family tree on one hand foreshadows the circumstances of the birth of Christ, and on the other hand blunts any attack on Mary. God had worked His will in the midst of whispers of scandal." (The Book of Genesis, Chapters 18-50, p.455-456)
Yet again, for our purposes, let us not forget that Tamar was also a Canaanite, not only a Gentile, but a person belonging to a nation of particularly wicked Gentiles. Yet here she is in the family tree. Let's thank God this Advent season for the One who came into the world from the Father, "full of grace and truth." (John 1:14). And let's keep on dreaming of that church that is made up of all nations and looks a lot like the church that is, even now, in heaven.
Monday, November 24, 2014
Thankful
My life changed dramatically in 2005 when, after 33 years of pastoring or assisting in mostly small town and rural northeastern and midwestern churches, I moved to Miami, Florida to begin an exciting new pastorate.
Since then, I have served an intercultural church for nine years within an intercultural district, lived in apartment buildings with intercultural neighbors, sang in an interdenominational community choir that also happened to be intercultural, have been part of an intercultural local pastors' association, currently assist with an intercultural choir of young adults with disabilities. and now, have married into a family of another culture.
Now while I can't celebrate that a previous divorce led to this new marriage (not a messy divorce, yet one brought about mostly by my mistakes), still I find myself in a very sweet spot in my life.
I am thankful for the "wonderful grace of Jesus" that has forgiven my sins and turned the ashes of the past into new beauty and has given me the oil of joy to replace my mourning, (Isaiah 61, the theme of our recent wedding).
I am thankful for my lovely and incredibly large-hearted new wife, Graciela, who was born and raised in Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic, and who only moved to Florida a few years before I did.
I am thankful for my two adult children, who continue to love me and accept Graciela (Grace), even as they continue to love and accept their mother, as they should. I am thankful for my three beautiful little granddaughters, Rebecca (Becca), Hannah, and Sarah, that my son, Mike and his wife, Stacy, have presented to us. I am thankful that both of my children, Leah and Mike, are highly gifted by the Lord and are serving the Lord in set-apart ministry.
I am thankful for my sister, Linda, also in ministry, serving as chaplain at our Brethren Home in Windber, PA, and for her husband, Jim, and for my two nieces, my nephew, and all of my great nieces and nephews, all of whom are seeking to follow Jesus.
I am thankful that my ex-wife and I can still be friends.
I am thankful for my new family that I have gained - all of Grace's nieces and nephews who call me "tio" and for her sisters who call me "cunado," and for the family I haven't met yet, some here in the states, some in the D.R.
I am thankful for new grandchildren, little Samantha, and 11-year-old Natalie, who told me she loves me (caused me to tear up a little).
I am thankful for the passion for Intercultural ministry and church planting which the Lord put on my heart when I came here. I am thankful for having the opportunity, through my District, to assist the Haitian Churches in Florida and to share with our churches in Puerto Rico. I am thankful for the opportunity to visit Haiti and to be going again in February to teach Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians in person to the Haitian Brethren pastors there.
I am thankful that next month, one of our pastors from the D.R. will be coming to visit for a few days to explore the possibility of starting a new Brethren Hispanic project in our area that I will be able to assist with.
I could go on, but you get the idea. I am blessed, I am thankful, and I will be reflecting on these things this week, as we enjoy our turkey and other fixings and prepare to move into the season of Advent.
I hope you have many things to celebrate this week as well. If you don't, I will pray that God will soon give you an Isaiah 61 experience as well and will lead you into some new and exciting ministry opportunities for the gospel.
This new ministry and this page are designed to reflect my passion for new churches and for intercultural churches. I look forward already, to the coming year and what it may bring. And I would love to share with your church or your District about these passions. Please contact me. May God grant you many blessings in Christ.
Since then, I have served an intercultural church for nine years within an intercultural district, lived in apartment buildings with intercultural neighbors, sang in an interdenominational community choir that also happened to be intercultural, have been part of an intercultural local pastors' association, currently assist with an intercultural choir of young adults with disabilities. and now, have married into a family of another culture.
Now while I can't celebrate that a previous divorce led to this new marriage (not a messy divorce, yet one brought about mostly by my mistakes), still I find myself in a very sweet spot in my life.
I am thankful for the "wonderful grace of Jesus" that has forgiven my sins and turned the ashes of the past into new beauty and has given me the oil of joy to replace my mourning, (Isaiah 61, the theme of our recent wedding).
I am thankful for my lovely and incredibly large-hearted new wife, Graciela, who was born and raised in Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic, and who only moved to Florida a few years before I did.
I am thankful for my two adult children, who continue to love me and accept Graciela (Grace), even as they continue to love and accept their mother, as they should. I am thankful for my three beautiful little granddaughters, Rebecca (Becca), Hannah, and Sarah, that my son, Mike and his wife, Stacy, have presented to us. I am thankful that both of my children, Leah and Mike, are highly gifted by the Lord and are serving the Lord in set-apart ministry.
I am thankful for my sister, Linda, also in ministry, serving as chaplain at our Brethren Home in Windber, PA, and for her husband, Jim, and for my two nieces, my nephew, and all of my great nieces and nephews, all of whom are seeking to follow Jesus.
I am thankful that my ex-wife and I can still be friends.
I am thankful for my new family that I have gained - all of Grace's nieces and nephews who call me "tio" and for her sisters who call me "cunado," and for the family I haven't met yet, some here in the states, some in the D.R.
I am thankful for new grandchildren, little Samantha, and 11-year-old Natalie, who told me she loves me (caused me to tear up a little).
I am thankful for the passion for Intercultural ministry and church planting which the Lord put on my heart when I came here. I am thankful for having the opportunity, through my District, to assist the Haitian Churches in Florida and to share with our churches in Puerto Rico. I am thankful for the opportunity to visit Haiti and to be going again in February to teach Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians in person to the Haitian Brethren pastors there.
I am thankful that next month, one of our pastors from the D.R. will be coming to visit for a few days to explore the possibility of starting a new Brethren Hispanic project in our area that I will be able to assist with.
I could go on, but you get the idea. I am blessed, I am thankful, and I will be reflecting on these things this week, as we enjoy our turkey and other fixings and prepare to move into the season of Advent.
I hope you have many things to celebrate this week as well. If you don't, I will pray that God will soon give you an Isaiah 61 experience as well and will lead you into some new and exciting ministry opportunities for the gospel.
This new ministry and this page are designed to reflect my passion for new churches and for intercultural churches. I look forward already, to the coming year and what it may bring. And I would love to share with your church or your District about these passions. Please contact me. May God grant you many blessings in Christ.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
The Curse of Whom?
As I said last time, racism is stupid. Please read that blog to see my reasoning. This time I want to restate this proposition and expose one of the worst misinterpretations of Scripture in the history of the church - namely, that because God cursed Ham, the son of Noah, it means that people of black skin are inferior. As little as 150-200 years ago, this was still being propogated from pulpits in parts of our land. It would be hard to believe that anyone still accepts this premise today, but it is likely that a few still do.
Overall, I know that I am preaching to the choir here, but just in case you run into someone who still holds this inane view, maybe I can provide you with some ways to answer them. I am indebted, in part, to Dr. Tony Evans, pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship in Dallas, Texas, for some of these thoughts.
The curse-of-Ham argument may have begun as a way for the religious world to explain the reality of racial differences, but it soon became an attempt to justify racial prejudice. This "doctrine" dominated the church during the era of slavery, and, unbelievably, it is still taught in some isolated pockets of the church today. In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was used to give permission for the reality of the slave trade in West Africa and the practice of slavery here in the west.
We find the story of Ham in Genesis 9, following the great flood. We recall that Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japeth. Some time after the flood, Noah got drunk on wine made from grapes in a vineyard he himself had planted. He took off his clothes inside his tent. Ham saw his father and told his brothers, supposedly in a mocking tone. Shem and Japheth, on the other hand, quickly covered their father up with their faces turned from him. Noah awoke later and had some understanding of what had happened. Thus came the curse given to his middle son. "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants he shall be to his brothers." Because of these words, the reasoning has been that since Ham moved south into what is now Africa and became the ancestor of the more dark-skinned people, then black people are and always have been under a divine curse of servitude. Black people should accept their place and white people should not feel guilty for enslaving them.
"Wait," you say, "I thought Noah cursed Ham." No, the Bible never says that. Noah cursed his grandson,. the son of Ham. Why?
Yes, Ham should have covered Noah up himself instead of going to his brothers and saying, "You should see our father. He's pathetic!" He dishonored his father, a capital offense under the Torah. Shem and Japheth restored their father's honor. After Babel, it is true that Ham became father to dark skinned peoples of Africa, Shem became father to Semitic, brown skinned people of the Middle East, and Japheth migrated north and became father to the more Aryan and Asian peoples.
But to even speak of a curse of Ham is to misread Scripture. The curse was clearly on his son. Ham had four sons, but Noah did not curse them all, only Canaan. Ham was punished for dishonoring his father by having a son who would bring dishonor to him.
The curse was on Canaan and his descendants. and these were - the Canaanites: evil, pagan, totally godless and violent people who were in the Promised Land when Israel entered to conquer it. The issue of God's curse was never skin color, it was sin! This is natural, becaue only sin brings about the curse of God. Israel was told to eradicate them.. They did not do a complete job, but those who were not killed became servants to the Israelites, and eventually, in a reasonably short time, ceased to exist as a nation.
So why did the slave trade even become a reality, when a simple reading of the text would dispel the theory that was being proclaimed? Sadly, it was a chance for profit. In all likelihood, even the preachers knew the truth, but their parishioners (and some of them) were benefiting too much and just could not face the truth.
By the way, why did God curse Ham's son and not Ham, when it was Ham who did the dishonoring deed? Because God had already blessed Ham (Genesis 9:1), and He does not take back His blessings. So God provided another way for Ham to regret his actions.
Now quickly, let's balance this out with two other facts. First, the biblical truth: throughout the Old and New Testaments, black people are used of God to bless and benefit and become part of His people, both Israel and the Church. There is no time here to break that down, but in future posts, we will mention some of the black heroes of the Bible. There are more than you think.
Second, the historical truth: While some pastors and Christians (or at least, professed ones, though we cannot judge their hearts), promoted slavery from this passage, many other Christians like William Wilberforce in England, and Henry Ward Beecher here led the fight to end slavery, finally succeeding in their efforts. And of course, more and more pastors and leaders of all colors are leading His church today and influencing the church and the culture for good.
The bottom line is this: We are all Canaan. We are all born under God's curse because of our sin. But "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.' He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit." (Galatians 3:13-14) That promise to Abraham is that through his seed (Christ), all nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12:3). Hallelujah!
Overall, I know that I am preaching to the choir here, but just in case you run into someone who still holds this inane view, maybe I can provide you with some ways to answer them. I am indebted, in part, to Dr. Tony Evans, pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship in Dallas, Texas, for some of these thoughts.
The curse-of-Ham argument may have begun as a way for the religious world to explain the reality of racial differences, but it soon became an attempt to justify racial prejudice. This "doctrine" dominated the church during the era of slavery, and, unbelievably, it is still taught in some isolated pockets of the church today. In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was used to give permission for the reality of the slave trade in West Africa and the practice of slavery here in the west.
We find the story of Ham in Genesis 9, following the great flood. We recall that Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japeth. Some time after the flood, Noah got drunk on wine made from grapes in a vineyard he himself had planted. He took off his clothes inside his tent. Ham saw his father and told his brothers, supposedly in a mocking tone. Shem and Japheth, on the other hand, quickly covered their father up with their faces turned from him. Noah awoke later and had some understanding of what had happened. Thus came the curse given to his middle son. "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants he shall be to his brothers." Because of these words, the reasoning has been that since Ham moved south into what is now Africa and became the ancestor of the more dark-skinned people, then black people are and always have been under a divine curse of servitude. Black people should accept their place and white people should not feel guilty for enslaving them.
"Wait," you say, "I thought Noah cursed Ham." No, the Bible never says that. Noah cursed his grandson,. the son of Ham. Why?
Yes, Ham should have covered Noah up himself instead of going to his brothers and saying, "You should see our father. He's pathetic!" He dishonored his father, a capital offense under the Torah. Shem and Japheth restored their father's honor. After Babel, it is true that Ham became father to dark skinned peoples of Africa, Shem became father to Semitic, brown skinned people of the Middle East, and Japheth migrated north and became father to the more Aryan and Asian peoples.
But to even speak of a curse of Ham is to misread Scripture. The curse was clearly on his son. Ham had four sons, but Noah did not curse them all, only Canaan. Ham was punished for dishonoring his father by having a son who would bring dishonor to him.
The curse was on Canaan and his descendants. and these were - the Canaanites: evil, pagan, totally godless and violent people who were in the Promised Land when Israel entered to conquer it. The issue of God's curse was never skin color, it was sin! This is natural, becaue only sin brings about the curse of God. Israel was told to eradicate them.. They did not do a complete job, but those who were not killed became servants to the Israelites, and eventually, in a reasonably short time, ceased to exist as a nation.
So why did the slave trade even become a reality, when a simple reading of the text would dispel the theory that was being proclaimed? Sadly, it was a chance for profit. In all likelihood, even the preachers knew the truth, but their parishioners (and some of them) were benefiting too much and just could not face the truth.
By the way, why did God curse Ham's son and not Ham, when it was Ham who did the dishonoring deed? Because God had already blessed Ham (Genesis 9:1), and He does not take back His blessings. So God provided another way for Ham to regret his actions.
Now quickly, let's balance this out with two other facts. First, the biblical truth: throughout the Old and New Testaments, black people are used of God to bless and benefit and become part of His people, both Israel and the Church. There is no time here to break that down, but in future posts, we will mention some of the black heroes of the Bible. There are more than you think.
Second, the historical truth: While some pastors and Christians (or at least, professed ones, though we cannot judge their hearts), promoted slavery from this passage, many other Christians like William Wilberforce in England, and Henry Ward Beecher here led the fight to end slavery, finally succeeding in their efforts. And of course, more and more pastors and leaders of all colors are leading His church today and influencing the church and the culture for good.
The bottom line is this: We are all Canaan. We are all born under God's curse because of our sin. But "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.' He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit." (Galatians 3:13-14) That promise to Abraham is that through his seed (Christ), all nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12:3). Hallelujah!
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
From One Man
Racism is stupid. There, that's putting it bluntly. It's also evil. But it IS stupid. One simple sentence in Scripture puts the lie to it.
"From one man (God) made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands." (Acts 17:26)
Paul said these words during his address to the "eggheads" on Mars Hill in Athens. Granted, he was seeking to reach them more by philosophical thought than by Old Testament Scripture which would not connect with these educated Greeks. But in this one sentence, Paul upholds the reality of a historical Adam and plainly states that all human beings descend from him. We could also say that all human beings descend from one set of parents, since the name "Eve" means "mother of all living."
I like a page on Facebook called "The Poached Egg," which deals with Christian apologetics. I highly recommend it. A few days ago, an author and speaker named Dr. Richard Belcher made a defense of the historical Adam. In that post, he said that without this, the whole Pauline argument of original sin through one man falls apart. http://michaeljkruger.com/the-historical-adam-why-it-really-matters/ I think the argument against racism might also be weakened, if we just began as a group of beings all over the earth. Let's see, Jesus and Paul believed in a historical Adam, Many modern scholars, including those in the evangelical camp, do not. Who will I go with? No contest. I stand with Jesus and Paul.
In the final analysis, there really is only one race. Now I know that, anthropologically, there are said to be three - CAUCASIAN (Aryans, Hamites, Semites) MONGOLIAN (northern Mongolian, Chinese, IndoChinese, Japanese, Korean, Tibetan, Malayan, Polynesian, Maori, Micronesian, Eskimo, Native American) and NEGROID (African, Hottentots, Melanesians/Papua, "Negrito", Australian Aborigine, Dravidians, Sinhalese) - but, biblically, there is one: the HUMAN race. I say this because the nations were divided in Genesis 10-11, following the Tower of Babel incident. Still, all peoples come from either Shem, Ham, or Japheth, all of whom came from one man, Noah, who also came from one set of parents, Adam and Eve. There is just no way around it. We belong to the human race - that strange mixture of nobility and evil. We carry Adam's genes in us. Unfortunately, we also carry Adam's sin nature (which is why we ALL need a Savior, no matter what our ethnicity or skin color is).
It would be far more accurate to speak in terms of ETHNICITIES or NATIONALITIES than of races. I believe there is one race (maybe three sub-races, but I'm not sure I'm even ready to concede that. There might be a better term.), with a multitude of ethnicities within it. And God has determined these. He has chosen who would be darker skinned, and who would be lighter skinned. And the old children's song is spot on.
"Red and yellow, black and white, (all) are precious in his sight."
An argument simply cannot be made for the superiority or inferiority of any ethnicity or nationality. (More on that in the next blog).
We have one human father and mother (Adam and Eve), one Creator (God), and if we are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, one heavenly Father. To share these in common is all we need to be one people of God.
"From one man (God) made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands." (Acts 17:26)
Paul said these words during his address to the "eggheads" on Mars Hill in Athens. Granted, he was seeking to reach them more by philosophical thought than by Old Testament Scripture which would not connect with these educated Greeks. But in this one sentence, Paul upholds the reality of a historical Adam and plainly states that all human beings descend from him. We could also say that all human beings descend from one set of parents, since the name "Eve" means "mother of all living."
I like a page on Facebook called "The Poached Egg," which deals with Christian apologetics. I highly recommend it. A few days ago, an author and speaker named Dr. Richard Belcher made a defense of the historical Adam. In that post, he said that without this, the whole Pauline argument of original sin through one man falls apart. http://michaeljkruger.com/the-historical-adam-why-it-really-matters/ I think the argument against racism might also be weakened, if we just began as a group of beings all over the earth. Let's see, Jesus and Paul believed in a historical Adam, Many modern scholars, including those in the evangelical camp, do not. Who will I go with? No contest. I stand with Jesus and Paul.
In the final analysis, there really is only one race. Now I know that, anthropologically, there are said to be three - CAUCASIAN (Aryans, Hamites, Semites) MONGOLIAN (northern Mongolian, Chinese, IndoChinese, Japanese, Korean, Tibetan, Malayan, Polynesian, Maori, Micronesian, Eskimo, Native American) and NEGROID (African, Hottentots, Melanesians/Papua, "Negrito", Australian Aborigine, Dravidians, Sinhalese) - but, biblically, there is one: the HUMAN race. I say this because the nations were divided in Genesis 10-11, following the Tower of Babel incident. Still, all peoples come from either Shem, Ham, or Japheth, all of whom came from one man, Noah, who also came from one set of parents, Adam and Eve. There is just no way around it. We belong to the human race - that strange mixture of nobility and evil. We carry Adam's genes in us. Unfortunately, we also carry Adam's sin nature (which is why we ALL need a Savior, no matter what our ethnicity or skin color is).
It would be far more accurate to speak in terms of ETHNICITIES or NATIONALITIES than of races. I believe there is one race (maybe three sub-races, but I'm not sure I'm even ready to concede that. There might be a better term.), with a multitude of ethnicities within it. And God has determined these. He has chosen who would be darker skinned, and who would be lighter skinned. And the old children's song is spot on.
"Red and yellow, black and white, (all) are precious in his sight."
An argument simply cannot be made for the superiority or inferiority of any ethnicity or nationality. (More on that in the next blog).
We have one human father and mother (Adam and Eve), one Creator (God), and if we are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, one heavenly Father. To share these in common is all we need to be one people of God.
Friday, October 17, 2014
Whence the Imagery?
For my second post, I wanted to explore where I came up with the imagery for the wording I am using for my ministry and my blog address. It all comes out of Ephesians Chapter 3.
There Paul begins to pray for the church at Ephesus in verse 1, but something takes his train of thought in a different direction. He will return to the prayer in verse 14. From verses 2 to 13, Paul takes the church cosmic in his vision. It's a wonderful text.
In verses 2-6, Paul writes about the revelation of God which had been hidden to previous generations but which is now revealed through the New Testament apostles and prophets. This revelation is simply that it had always been God's plan to have a multi-ethnic, multi-national people. Verse 6 says, "This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus." (NIV) The original Greek is more concise. It says that the Gentiles were destined to be "co-heirs" (synkleronoma), "co-members" or "co-parts of the body" (syssoma), and "co-sharers" (symmetocha) in the church. Note the Greek prefix syn (pronounced sun to us) on all three words. In other words, God's eternal plan was that Gentile and Jewish believers now be fellow heirs of the same blessing (see also Galatians 3:26-29), fellow members of the same body (see also 1 Corinthians 12), and fellow partakers of the same promise. (John Stott, "Ephesians", The Bible Speaks Today Commentary, page 117)
Israel was never designed to be the one and only permanent people of God. God chose them because they were lowly and weak as a people so that He could receive glory through them. Part of their mission and purpose was to be a "light to the nations" (Isaiah 49:6). They failed, overall, in that purpose, first of all by becoming too much like the other nations, and then, after the Exile and Return, isolating themselves in self-righteousness from the other nations. God would therefore send the Messiah to create a new Jewish remnant which would become the catalyst for launching this, as Dr. John R. W. Stott calls it, "third race," made up of Jew and Gentile together, the barriers having been removed through the cross.
That's the divine revelation to Paul. Then in verses 7-13, we read about the divine commission to Paul, or his ministry - to preach to the Gentiles the boundless riches of Christ, and to explain the mystery to all of his hearers. In this paragraph, Paul makes a most astounding claim - that God's intent, ultimately, is that the church of Jesus Christ be on display, not only in the world, but in the entire cosmos - particularly to the "rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms" (i.e. angels). This third race, this church, this new people of God is described as God's "manifold wisdom." But that is not the literal translation of the word "manifold." The Greek term is polupoikilos - many-colored. In the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the root word poikilos, is used in Genesis 37:3 to describe none other than Joseph's coat of many colors.
That idea excites me. God's design is that the church be multi-colored (in flesh tones). loving each other in spite of their differences of color, culture, and class. This, in turn, is put on display to the angels, who see these redeemed, transformed people of God, and say, "Whoa! Now that's wisdom. Glory be to God!" Hence, my blog address, multicoloredwisdom@blogger.com.
This is reality in heaven right now, for all the saints who have gone before. And it's the daily reality of the areas in which most of us today live. Therefore, the church should be intentional about reflecting those realities and be "heaven's mirrror." And not only heaven's mirror, but "Miami's (insert your own community here) mirror." What an exciting prospect! After 30 years or so of ministry in, pretty much, white rural churches (no dismissal of that at all), I came here to find what God really has in mind for us all. I challenge us to let this be our intention as we move on into the 21st Century. Let's show our communities, our world, our universe, what God intended us to look like all along - a multi-colred people who love each other and reach out with the Good News to everyone.
There Paul begins to pray for the church at Ephesus in verse 1, but something takes his train of thought in a different direction. He will return to the prayer in verse 14. From verses 2 to 13, Paul takes the church cosmic in his vision. It's a wonderful text.
In verses 2-6, Paul writes about the revelation of God which had been hidden to previous generations but which is now revealed through the New Testament apostles and prophets. This revelation is simply that it had always been God's plan to have a multi-ethnic, multi-national people. Verse 6 says, "This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus." (NIV) The original Greek is more concise. It says that the Gentiles were destined to be "co-heirs" (synkleronoma), "co-members" or "co-parts of the body" (syssoma), and "co-sharers" (symmetocha) in the church. Note the Greek prefix syn (pronounced sun to us) on all three words. In other words, God's eternal plan was that Gentile and Jewish believers now be fellow heirs of the same blessing (see also Galatians 3:26-29), fellow members of the same body (see also 1 Corinthians 12), and fellow partakers of the same promise. (John Stott, "Ephesians", The Bible Speaks Today Commentary, page 117)
Israel was never designed to be the one and only permanent people of God. God chose them because they were lowly and weak as a people so that He could receive glory through them. Part of their mission and purpose was to be a "light to the nations" (Isaiah 49:6). They failed, overall, in that purpose, first of all by becoming too much like the other nations, and then, after the Exile and Return, isolating themselves in self-righteousness from the other nations. God would therefore send the Messiah to create a new Jewish remnant which would become the catalyst for launching this, as Dr. John R. W. Stott calls it, "third race," made up of Jew and Gentile together, the barriers having been removed through the cross.
That's the divine revelation to Paul. Then in verses 7-13, we read about the divine commission to Paul, or his ministry - to preach to the Gentiles the boundless riches of Christ, and to explain the mystery to all of his hearers. In this paragraph, Paul makes a most astounding claim - that God's intent, ultimately, is that the church of Jesus Christ be on display, not only in the world, but in the entire cosmos - particularly to the "rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms" (i.e. angels). This third race, this church, this new people of God is described as God's "manifold wisdom." But that is not the literal translation of the word "manifold." The Greek term is polupoikilos - many-colored. In the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the root word poikilos, is used in Genesis 37:3 to describe none other than Joseph's coat of many colors.
That idea excites me. God's design is that the church be multi-colored (in flesh tones). loving each other in spite of their differences of color, culture, and class. This, in turn, is put on display to the angels, who see these redeemed, transformed people of God, and say, "Whoa! Now that's wisdom. Glory be to God!" Hence, my blog address, multicoloredwisdom@blogger.com.
This is reality in heaven right now, for all the saints who have gone before. And it's the daily reality of the areas in which most of us today live. Therefore, the church should be intentional about reflecting those realities and be "heaven's mirrror." And not only heaven's mirror, but "Miami's (insert your own community here) mirror." What an exciting prospect! After 30 years or so of ministry in, pretty much, white rural churches (no dismissal of that at all), I came here to find what God really has in mind for us all. I challenge us to let this be our intention as we move on into the 21st Century. Let's show our communities, our world, our universe, what God intended us to look like all along - a multi-colred people who love each other and reach out with the Good News to everyone.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
The Goal of This New Ministry
Mark Deymaz of Mosaic Ministries was a speaker at Exponential, a national church planting conference that I attended in Orlando in 2013. I sat in on his special track of workshops and was greatly blessed as well as challenged. Two statistics he shared stood out to me above all the others. Churches as a whole in the United States are 10 times more segregated than their neighborhoods and 20 times more segregated than their nearby public schools. Mark then asked, "If the Kingdom of Heaven is not segregated, how can the churches be?"
That is why I am starting this new ministry. I am "semi-retired" at this point. I have retired from full-time pastoring, but I have no intention of retiring from ministry. I am excited about what God may yet use me to do.
Since moving to Miami, Florida in 2005, my life has undergone a number of changes, many good, a few not so much. But one thing that has changed is that my horizons have been broadened in two specific areas - multi-ethnic churches (I served one for nine years), and church planting (my District got me interested in this, and it is now a passion of mine).
I should add that I have also lived in several multi-ethnic apartment complexes, sung in a multi-ethnic community worship choir, got involved in our denomination's intercultural programming, and am now married to a lovely lady of another culture.
My goal is to encourage the planting and multiplying of new churches and to push us toward being intentional about these new churches being multi-ethnic and intercultural. Of course, I also want to see our established churches become intentional in this area as well.
Future blogs will give Scriptural support for these things and get us thinking about why and how we are to be doing this. From time to time, I may address other topics of a more devotional nature.
I want to be available to the wider church to help in any way that I can to get us to where our churches more and more look like the communities in which we live right now and like the home to which we are going, if we trust Christ, in the near future. Your prayers and invitations will be appreciated.
That is why I am starting this new ministry. I am "semi-retired" at this point. I have retired from full-time pastoring, but I have no intention of retiring from ministry. I am excited about what God may yet use me to do.
Since moving to Miami, Florida in 2005, my life has undergone a number of changes, many good, a few not so much. But one thing that has changed is that my horizons have been broadened in two specific areas - multi-ethnic churches (I served one for nine years), and church planting (my District got me interested in this, and it is now a passion of mine).
I should add that I have also lived in several multi-ethnic apartment complexes, sung in a multi-ethnic community worship choir, got involved in our denomination's intercultural programming, and am now married to a lovely lady of another culture.
My goal is to encourage the planting and multiplying of new churches and to push us toward being intentional about these new churches being multi-ethnic and intercultural. Of course, I also want to see our established churches become intentional in this area as well.
Future blogs will give Scriptural support for these things and get us thinking about why and how we are to be doing this. From time to time, I may address other topics of a more devotional nature.
I want to be available to the wider church to help in any way that I can to get us to where our churches more and more look like the communities in which we live right now and like the home to which we are going, if we trust Christ, in the near future. Your prayers and invitations will be appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)