Atheists have become evangelistic as of late. The group "American Atheists" has launched an advertising campaign that seeks to take back the holidays from Christians. They have paid for billboards to be erected that claim that "You Know It's a Myth: This Season, Celebrate Reason." The group claims that the ads are designed to embolden "closet atheists" who "go along to get along, to "attack the myth that Christianity owns the solstice season" and to raise awareness (and one presumes money) of its group.
What should be our response to people who go out of their way to ridicule our faith, even at a time of the year when that faith is the most visible? Well, there is on old saying that "Living well is the best revenge." The very best way we can defend our faith is to treat its detractors and opponents with respect as we live out our faith in positive and proactive ways. The very worst thing we can do when someone belittles our faith is to respond in a way that is beneath our faith. We need to show everyone that faith works, and that means we must live it in positive and loving ways. That is exactly the point that Peter makes in todays reading from 1 Peter 2:15-17 when he says--
For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.
Show proper respect to everyone. Silence ignorant talk by the way that we live. Show the world that faith works, that it makes us mature, whole people of integrity and joy. When we live right before the world, these kinds of criticism just loose their punch
"Much dreaming and many words are meaningless. Therefore stand in awe of God." (Ecclesiates 5:7)
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Happy Thanksgiving
Most of our Thanksgiving Day traditions seem to come from those Massachusetts Pilgrims and 1622. That’s always been annoying to me; the first Thanksgiving was at Berkeley Plantation, Virginia, in 1619. I had Virginia history 3 times in my elementary and high school years, and they taught us this stuff. In fact, all US history is really Virginia history since the original claim for the Virginia Colony was from sea to sea and pole to pole! Those pesky Pilgrims of Plymouth simply had a better press agent!
You know the story; 103 of 158 of the original Massachusetts colonists died the very first winter. The Pilgrims managed to survive (good ol' Squanto) and the bountiful harvest that next fall ensured the continued survival of the colony. So Gov. William Bradford declared that a festival of thanksgiving be observed to God. This Thanksgiving festival became an annual event in Massachusetts by 1690, but it didn’t become the recurring national Thanksgiving Day holiday until Abraham Lincoln proclaimed it so in 1863.
And perhaps this is the trouble with Thanksgiving for many of us today. The first Thanksgivings took place following tremendous struggle after a devastating winter almost destroyed the colony. The first national Thanksgiving Day was proclaimed in the middle of the devastating tragedy of the Civil War. Our Thanksgiving Day today retains many of the forms and traditions, but few have to do with same struggle! Thanksgiving is our day to eat ourselves silly and then complain how terrible we feel afterward. Thanksgiving for us is a day off from work, with family, and to nap in front of football until all the sales begin on Black Friday. That’s the problem with Thanksgiving—we have one day to reflect on our stuff and then we go get more stuff!
Thanksgiving was born in struggle and from struggle. Is it possible that we are too blessed to really be too thankful? Will Rogers drew this contrast between thanksgiving then and now:
You know the story; 103 of 158 of the original Massachusetts colonists died the very first winter. The Pilgrims managed to survive (good ol' Squanto) and the bountiful harvest that next fall ensured the continued survival of the colony. So Gov. William Bradford declared that a festival of thanksgiving be observed to God. This Thanksgiving festival became an annual event in Massachusetts by 1690, but it didn’t become the recurring national Thanksgiving Day holiday until Abraham Lincoln proclaimed it so in 1863.
And perhaps this is the trouble with Thanksgiving for many of us today. The first Thanksgivings took place following tremendous struggle after a devastating winter almost destroyed the colony. The first national Thanksgiving Day was proclaimed in the middle of the devastating tragedy of the Civil War. Our Thanksgiving Day today retains many of the forms and traditions, but few have to do with same struggle! Thanksgiving is our day to eat ourselves silly and then complain how terrible we feel afterward. Thanksgiving for us is a day off from work, with family, and to nap in front of football until all the sales begin on Black Friday. That’s the problem with Thanksgiving—we have one day to reflect on our stuff and then we go get more stuff!
Thanksgiving was born in struggle and from struggle. Is it possible that we are too blessed to really be too thankful? Will Rogers drew this contrast between thanksgiving then and now:
In the days of our founders, people were willing to give thanks for mighty little, for mighty little was all that they expected. But now neither government nor nature can give enough but what we think is too little. In the fall of the year, if the founders could gather in a few pumpkins, some potatoes, and some corn for the winter, they were in a thanking mood. But if we can’t gather in a new car, a new radio...and some government relief, why we feel that the world is against us.We have too much, and therefore we expect too much, to really be truly thankful. We are so focused on our stuff that we fail to see the God who gives. May God forgive us and cause us to refocus on the things that really matter. And may we be thankful.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
How Not to Invite a Co-Worker to Your Church
It's almost time to start thinking about our New Year's resolutions for 2011. I don't know how it happened that 2010 is now almost gone, but it is. Once we get past Thanksgiving on Thursday, the rest of the year will fly by in a blur. So we need to get to work right away on our resolutions. And I know that many of us will resolve to be better at evangelism this next year. So you help us get started on our resolution to be more evangelistic, I post this video on "How Not to Invite a Co-Worker to Church."
We do need to be inviting people to church and church activities. We don't need the preacher to be cool (thank goodness). But what we do need is the conviction that people need God and that they can find Him where we find Him.
We do need to be inviting people to church and church activities. We don't need the preacher to be cool (thank goodness). But what we do need is the conviction that people need God and that they can find Him where we find Him.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Let No Debt Remain Outstanding
I had Lynn's car inspected several weeks ago (it passed, hooray!). When I paid Guy the $16 for the inspection, he noticed that the lamination was peeling off my credit card. I am literally wearing my credit card out! So you think that maybe I'm using it too much? Credit cards are a real convenience, and we do pay off our balance each month. But the problem with credit cards is that they are a convenience; they make it very convenient to buy things you don't need with money that you don't have. The average family carries about $8000 in credit card debt.
Paul told the Romans, "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another" (Rom 12:8). We are called by God to be faithful stewards of the blessings that he has entrusted to us and to share with those in need. Timothy is told to tell those who have money "to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. 19 In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life" (1 Tim 6:18-19).
Too many if us have compromised our ability to do good works and share with others because we have over-obligated ourselves with debt buying things that we can't really afford. Think about it-- if you are carrying $8000 in revolving credit card debt, then you bought $8000 worth of things that you couldn't afford. That is so simple that its not even funny... well, maybe it is funny. Watch this Hulu clip.
We call the Friday after Thanksgiving "Black Friday" because this is the number #1 shopping day when retailers recoup losses and get in the black. Maybe we should call it "Red Friday" because it is when many shoppers begin their overspending and running up balances on their credit cards. Maybe we should implement this policy of "if you don't have money, then don't buy things." It seems pretty simple really. It also seems pretty Biblical.
Paul told the Romans, "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another" (Rom 12:8). We are called by God to be faithful stewards of the blessings that he has entrusted to us and to share with those in need. Timothy is told to tell those who have money "to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. 19 In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life" (1 Tim 6:18-19).
Too many if us have compromised our ability to do good works and share with others because we have over-obligated ourselves with debt buying things that we can't really afford. Think about it-- if you are carrying $8000 in revolving credit card debt, then you bought $8000 worth of things that you couldn't afford. That is so simple that its not even funny... well, maybe it is funny. Watch this Hulu clip.
We call the Friday after Thanksgiving "Black Friday" because this is the number #1 shopping day when retailers recoup losses and get in the black. Maybe we should call it "Red Friday" because it is when many shoppers begin their overspending and running up balances on their credit cards. Maybe we should implement this policy of "if you don't have money, then don't buy things." It seems pretty simple really. It also seems pretty Biblical.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
The Blood of the Cross
The accounts of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ in the gospels share very few details about the actual crucifixion itself. Oh, we are told several of the things that Jesus said from the cross. We are told some of what the Jewish religious leaders said and did there. But as far as the actual details of the crucifixion, there isn’t a lot of information. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John say little except “When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left.” (Lk 23:33). The actual historical documents that tell of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus don’t give us many details about exactly what Jesus suffered on the cross.
Of course, the writers didn’t have to give a lot of the brutal details of the crucifixion because their readers knew those details all too well. Crucifixion was not just a manner of execution, it was a form of torture and terror designed to keep the subjugated citizenry in their place. First century people knew exactly what happened when someone was crucified. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not have to give a detailed explanation of the horror of crucifixion; all they had to do was to say that Jesus was crucified.
One of the criticisms of the movie The Passion of the Christ was the over-the-top portrayal (in super-slow motion) of the bloody gore and violence associated with the crucifixion. I read somewhere that Gibson used many times more fake blood in The Passion than he did in Braveheart (another movie not for the squeamish), and that is probably about right. Roger Ebert (in a very positive review of the movie), said this—
So did the movie use too much stage blood and make too much out of the blood of the crucifixion? I'll leave that question up to the movie critics. What I will say is that while the gospels don’t really stress the blood spilled at the crucifixion, the rest of the New Testament does the blood of the cross quite a bit. Our reading today from Hebrews 9 uses the word “blood” 11 times (Hebrews 10 uses it another 6 times). The writer points his Jewish readers to the Old Testament purification rituals and reminds them that everything was purified by blood, “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood” (9:22a). Jesus purifies us by offering his own blood (9:12). His point is that the blood that Jesus offered on the cross is far superior to the blood that purified in the Old Testament rituals--
Is the imagery of blood repulsive to our modern sensitivities? Well, it should be. It shouldn’t be repulsive because our constitutions are so delicate that we are easily offended by such things. The imagery of blood should repulse us because it represents our sinfulness and rebellion and the high price it cost Jesus to love us. The gospel is soaked in the blood of Jesus.
What can wash away my sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus!
Of course, the writers didn’t have to give a lot of the brutal details of the crucifixion because their readers knew those details all too well. Crucifixion was not just a manner of execution, it was a form of torture and terror designed to keep the subjugated citizenry in their place. First century people knew exactly what happened when someone was crucified. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not have to give a detailed explanation of the horror of crucifixion; all they had to do was to say that Jesus was crucified.
One of the criticisms of the movie The Passion of the Christ was the over-the-top portrayal (in super-slow motion) of the bloody gore and violence associated with the crucifixion. I read somewhere that Gibson used many times more fake blood in The Passion than he did in Braveheart (another movie not for the squeamish), and that is probably about right. Roger Ebert (in a very positive review of the movie), said this—
“The movie is 126 minutes long, and I would guess that at least 100 of those minutes, maybe more, are concerned specifically and graphically with the details of the torture and death of Jesus. This is the most violent film I have ever seen.”The Passion focused on the violence of the crucifixion, and that is not really the emphasis in the Biblical story at all. Despite the mega-gallons of stage blood used in the movie, the gospel writers mention blood only once in their account, “One of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water” (Jn 19:34). (Actually, the word "blood" is also used in Matt 27:25 when the mob protested to Pilate, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" Gibson chose not to include that line in the movie due to suggestions of antisemitism.)
So did the movie use too much stage blood and make too much out of the blood of the crucifixion? I'll leave that question up to the movie critics. What I will say is that while the gospels don’t really stress the blood spilled at the crucifixion, the rest of the New Testament does the blood of the cross quite a bit. Our reading today from Hebrews 9 uses the word “blood” 11 times (Hebrews 10 uses it another 6 times). The writer points his Jewish readers to the Old Testament purification rituals and reminds them that everything was purified by blood, “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood” (9:22a). Jesus purifies us by offering his own blood (9:12). His point is that the blood that Jesus offered on the cross is far superior to the blood that purified in the Old Testament rituals--
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! (9:13-14).It is still true that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” (9:22b). Jesus went through the agony of the cross to pay the price for our sin and to purify us through the shedding of His own blood.
Is the imagery of blood repulsive to our modern sensitivities? Well, it should be. It shouldn’t be repulsive because our constitutions are so delicate that we are easily offended by such things. The imagery of blood should repulse us because it represents our sinfulness and rebellion and the high price it cost Jesus to love us. The gospel is soaked in the blood of Jesus.
What can wash away my sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus!
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
A Little Bit More
Leo Tolstoy once wrote a story about a successful peasant farmer who was not satisfied with his lot. One day he received a novel offer. For 1000 rubles, he could buy all the land he could walk around in a day. The only catch was that he had to be back at his starting point by sundown. Early the next morning he started out walking at a fast pace. By midday he was very tired, but he kept going, covering more and more ground. Well into the afternoon he realized that his greed had taken him far from the starting point. He quickened his pace and as the sun began to sink low in the sky, he began to run, knowing that if he did not make it back by sundown the opportunity to become an even bigger landholder would be lost. As the sun began to sink below the horizon he came within sight of the finish line. Gasping for breath, he staggered across the finish line just before the sun disappeared. He immediately collapsed, and in a few minutes he was dead. Afterwards, his servants dug his grave; so his final land grab was six feet long and three feet wide. The title of Tolstoy's story was How Much Land Does a Man Need?
In Proverbs 30, we are given insight into Jesus' instruction for us to pray, "Give us today our daily bread." Here the writer sees both wealth and poverty, success and failure as enemies to be avoided. He prays that God will give him just enough in Proverbs 30:7-9--
Who is it that you are like. Are you like Tolstoy's farmer who constantly wants more and more... and thus can't enjoy what it is that you have. Or have you learned the secret expressed by the writer of Proverbs-- satisfied with what you have because it is just enough? The difference here is the difference between us owning able to our things and us letting our things come to own us!
In Proverbs 30, we are given insight into Jesus' instruction for us to pray, "Give us today our daily bread." Here the writer sees both wealth and poverty, success and failure as enemies to be avoided. He prays that God will give him just enough in Proverbs 30:7-9--
7 “Two things I ask of you, O Lord; do not refuse me before I die:
8 Keep falsehood and lies far from me; give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
9 Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you and say,‘Who is the Lord?’
Or I may become poor and steal, and so dishonor the name of my God.If we have too much, then we will be tempted to have pride in ourselves and decide that we don't need God. If we have too little, then we may be tempted to steal and dishonor God. So the prayer is that God will give him just enough-- his daily bread.
Who is it that you are like. Are you like Tolstoy's farmer who constantly wants more and more... and thus can't enjoy what it is that you have. Or have you learned the secret expressed by the writer of Proverbs-- satisfied with what you have because it is just enough? The difference here is the difference between us owning able to our things and us letting our things come to own us!
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
From Philemon to Eternity
Our reading for today is the little book of Philemon. This is an intensely private letter written from Paul to Philemon, a member of the church at Colossae. The book concerns Onesimus, a runaway slave that belonged to Philemon whom Paul had met in Rome and converted to Christ. Because Onesimus is Philemon’s property, Paul sends him back to Philemon. But because Onesimus is so dear to Paul and such a help in his ministry, Paul drops not so subtle hints that Philemon should free Onesimus and so that he could return to Rome.
That raises a much bigger question. Why didn’t Paul just blast the institution of slavery itself? I believe that slavery is evil. Not only that, I believe God thinks it is evil. My problem is that God never said it was evil; in fact, He permits and regulates it in the Old Testament and includes lengthy section on how slaves and their owners are to behave in the church (Eph. 6:5-9, Col. 3:22-4:1)
The New Testament never condemns the institution of slavery. It tells slaves to accept their lot, even if mistreated by abusive owners (1 Peter 2:18ff). Even Jesus assumes the institution of slavery (Lk 17:7) and never condemns it as sin!
Churchmen of the 1800’s pointed to these verses as justification of slavery. Even those who did not actively support the practice of slavery taught that the Bible at least affirmed its morality. Alexander Campbell said, “There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral.” Well, Campbell right… and completely and absolutely wrong! Slavery, both in first century Rome and nineteenth century America, was a reprehensible affront to our Holy God. The whole witness of the Bible speaks out against slavery even though you’ll never find the subject directly addressed.
Why didn’t Paul condemn slavery? There wasn’t anything directly he could do. The Roman economy and social order was based on slavery. If Paul directly condemned slavery, the world would have rejected the gospel. Slavery was a systemic evil; it had to be dealt with systemically. Paul struck at slavery in Galatians 3:28— in Christ, there is neither slave nor free. Yes, he commanded slaves to obey and respect their masters, but he also demanded masters relate to their slaves based upon mutual brotherhood in Christ. That led to slavery’s fall; as Christianity spread, then slavery ceased to exist in Rome!
William Webb in his book Slaves, Women and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis, calls this a “redemptive hermeneutic.” In the chart, X is the original culture that the Bible’s words (Y) were meant to inform. First century masters were taught not to treat slaves as property, and this moved them closer to God’s heart (Z). But the Bible didn’t end with the first century; it was written for all times and all cultures. It’s words are redemptive, carrying us beyond that was written to Ephesus and Colossae and Philemon. Everything scripture says about the golden rule, equality and love demands that we go beyond its specific words on slavery. Our world is closer to God’s heart on the subject of slavery; we know that it’s wrong to own people. So the words of scripture continue to speak to us and move us closer to the heart of God in how we treat people. To use Bible’s words as our pattern on slavery would move us further from God. And yet we have much further in order to reach God’s will on full love and unity.
In other words, the whole Bible does for us the same thing Paul did for Philemon. Paul could have demanded Philemon to free Onesimus; he didn't, but he did make demands that would ensure Philemon did free Onesimus. The Bible could have demanded that all slave owners free their slaves (and throw the entire Roman world into utter chaos). What God did is call slave owners closer to His heart and gave them principles that, when conscientiously applied, would lead to the conclusion that the entire institution of slavery was evil and should be dismantled. And that’s precisely what happened.
Now what is the application we should make to women and their full inclusion into church ministry and leadership? Oh my, would you look at the time!
I am sending him—who is my very heart—back to you. I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel. But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do will be spontaneous and not forced. (Philemon 12-14)Paul offers to pay any expenses that Philemon has incurred because of Onesimus’ absence… but only after pointing out the huge debt that Philemon already owed Paul (v. 19). Why didn’t Paul just come out and TELL Philemon what to do? He wanted Philemon to do the right thing for the right reason. And he recognizes that given the socioeconomic reality under which both Philemon and Onesimus lived, Philemon had property rights that Paul was unwilling to violate. Philemon had to come to see on his own that the right thing was to free Onesimus.
That raises a much bigger question. Why didn’t Paul just blast the institution of slavery itself? I believe that slavery is evil. Not only that, I believe God thinks it is evil. My problem is that God never said it was evil; in fact, He permits and regulates it in the Old Testament and includes lengthy section on how slaves and their owners are to behave in the church (Eph. 6:5-9, Col. 3:22-4:1)
- Slaves were to obey and respect their masters, even if the master wasn’t watching. They were to serve them as if they were serving God.
- Masters were to treat their slaves fairly and justly, not with threats or violence, recognizing that they had a Master in heaven.
The New Testament never condemns the institution of slavery. It tells slaves to accept their lot, even if mistreated by abusive owners (1 Peter 2:18ff). Even Jesus assumes the institution of slavery (Lk 17:7) and never condemns it as sin!
Churchmen of the 1800’s pointed to these verses as justification of slavery. Even those who did not actively support the practice of slavery taught that the Bible at least affirmed its morality. Alexander Campbell said, “There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral.” Well, Campbell right… and completely and absolutely wrong! Slavery, both in first century Rome and nineteenth century America, was a reprehensible affront to our Holy God. The whole witness of the Bible speaks out against slavery even though you’ll never find the subject directly addressed.
Why didn’t Paul condemn slavery? There wasn’t anything directly he could do. The Roman economy and social order was based on slavery. If Paul directly condemned slavery, the world would have rejected the gospel. Slavery was a systemic evil; it had to be dealt with systemically. Paul struck at slavery in Galatians 3:28— in Christ, there is neither slave nor free. Yes, he commanded slaves to obey and respect their masters, but he also demanded masters relate to their slaves based upon mutual brotherhood in Christ. That led to slavery’s fall; as Christianity spread, then slavery ceased to exist in Rome!
William Webb in his book Slaves, Women and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis, calls this a “redemptive hermeneutic.” In the chart, X is the original culture that the Bible’s words (Y) were meant to inform. First century masters were taught not to treat slaves as property, and this moved them closer to God’s heart (Z). But the Bible didn’t end with the first century; it was written for all times and all cultures. It’s words are redemptive, carrying us beyond that was written to Ephesus and Colossae and Philemon. Everything scripture says about the golden rule, equality and love demands that we go beyond its specific words on slavery. Our world is closer to God’s heart on the subject of slavery; we know that it’s wrong to own people. So the words of scripture continue to speak to us and move us closer to the heart of God in how we treat people. To use Bible’s words as our pattern on slavery would move us further from God. And yet we have much further in order to reach God’s will on full love and unity.
In other words, the whole Bible does for us the same thing Paul did for Philemon. Paul could have demanded Philemon to free Onesimus; he didn't, but he did make demands that would ensure Philemon did free Onesimus. The Bible could have demanded that all slave owners free their slaves (and throw the entire Roman world into utter chaos). What God did is call slave owners closer to His heart and gave them principles that, when conscientiously applied, would lead to the conclusion that the entire institution of slavery was evil and should be dismantled. And that’s precisely what happened.
Now what is the application we should make to women and their full inclusion into church ministry and leadership? Oh my, would you look at the time!
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
All I Need...
There’s an old story about the rich man who learns from an angel that his time on earth was at its end. The rich man asked for special permission to take his wealth with him. Of course, that violated the rules-- "you can’t take it with you." He applied for an special exemption, and wonder of wonders, it was approved. He was told that he could take one suitcase with him to heaven. So he quickly converted all his assets to gold, packed a huge steamer trunk and off he went to heaven. Of course, St. Peter was there at the pearly gates ( he always is in these stories) and stopped the man from entering, "Sorry, but we don’t allow luggage." The man produced the paperwork and said, "But I have special permission." Well, Peter was intrigued, "What do you have in there that is so important?" The man opened up the trunk stepped back proudly as Peter looked in. Peter looked up totally puzzled, "Pavement? You brought pavement?"
We have a very hard time seeing gold as only pavement, but that's what it is in heaven. But down here in the "real world," money and the things it buys is what makes the world go 'round. In a recent class I quoted Woody Allen who supposedly said, "Money is important if only for financial reasons." But we stress money for far more than mere financial reasons. For us, money is a gauge of value ("How much is he worth?") and a symbol of freedom (as in "independently wealthy"). At times we are all that guy from Jerry McGuire running around yelling, "Show me the money!"
In our reading for today from 1 Timothy 6, Paul warns us about the spiritual dangers of being that guy. He reminds us of the rule the rich man tried to get around in our story-- "We can’t take it with us." Because that rule has no exceptions, we need to be very careful how much value we place on money and the things of money. Paul says that when we love money too much, we fall headlong into Satan’s trap.
So what are we supposed to do? Paul says the key is to "be content." Not just be content, but be content with having food to eat and clothes to wear. Not just content with food and clothes, but be content while realizing that not being content gives Satan a target in our lives at which to shoot his flaming arrows.
We’re all a bunch of Jerks. Or at least, we are all a lot like Steve Martin in this scene from The Jerk. It is so hard for us to be content with the things that we have. All we need is just one more thing. And the more we focus on that one more thing, the more we miss God in the process.
We have a very hard time seeing gold as only pavement, but that's what it is in heaven. But down here in the "real world," money and the things it buys is what makes the world go 'round. In a recent class I quoted Woody Allen who supposedly said, "Money is important if only for financial reasons." But we stress money for far more than mere financial reasons. For us, money is a gauge of value ("How much is he worth?") and a symbol of freedom (as in "independently wealthy"). At times we are all that guy from Jerry McGuire running around yelling, "Show me the money!"
In our reading for today from 1 Timothy 6, Paul warns us about the spiritual dangers of being that guy. He reminds us of the rule the rich man tried to get around in our story-- "We can’t take it with us." Because that rule has no exceptions, we need to be very careful how much value we place on money and the things of money. Paul says that when we love money too much, we fall headlong into Satan’s trap.
6 But godliness with contentment is great gain. 7 For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. 8 But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. 9 People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.There’s nothing wrong be having money; later in this chapter Paul will counsel the rich on how to invest their money so that it shows up on their balance sheet in heaven (1 Tim 6:17-19). Here the warning is to those who aren’t rich but want very much to be so. When we focus too much on money and the stuff it buys, we are just too open to Satan’s temptations. Like the Rhinestone Cowboy, "There’ll be a load of compromising on the road to my horizon…" The more we focus on stuff, the less we focus on God.
So what are we supposed to do? Paul says the key is to "be content." Not just be content, but be content with having food to eat and clothes to wear. Not just content with food and clothes, but be content while realizing that not being content gives Satan a target in our lives at which to shoot his flaming arrows.
We’re all a bunch of Jerks. Or at least, we are all a lot like Steve Martin in this scene from The Jerk. It is so hard for us to be content with the things that we have. All we need is just one more thing. And the more we focus on that one more thing, the more we miss God in the process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

