The Old, Old Story

If you went to the library at Harding University Graduate School of Religion in Memphis, you could find an impressively (and expensively) bound copy my master’s research project entitled “The Use of Computers by Preachers in Small Churches.” You’d have to go to Memphis—I don’t have a copy. The research paper contains leading edge, state-of-art research on the church’s use of computers... in the early 1980’s. In case you don’t remember, one of the great issues was the supplanting of WordStar by WordPerfect as the dominant word processing program. There is not one single page in that paper that would be helpful in the least today (except perhaps as comic relief).

The new quickly becomes old. That which is cutting-edge and relevant today is old and irrelevant tomorrow. Unfortunately, the church has proved this true. We stressed “restoring the New Testament church” which in many ways meant simply re-imagining it in the lens of the rationalism of current thinking (current in the early nineteenth century). Later we stressed making the church more user-friendly and contemporary. Very often when the church needs revitalizing, we turn to external forms and formats. We tweak our organizational charts, redesign our buildings and revamping our ministries. Sometimes that must be done, but it is never long before we need to start all over again,

What we need is less focus on the EXTERNAL things of the church and more focus on ETERNAL story upon which the church must forever stand. We return to the story today as we begin reading Mark’s gospel in our daily reading. Mark’s telling of the story is not dramatically different from Matthew’s, although there are nuances. Mark is more focused on action; his favorite word is “immediately” (NASB) or "straightway" (KJV) as he moves from one action story to another. Mark’s story is told differently than Matthew’s (or Luke’s or John’s), but it is the same story. And it is the story of the church.

The old, old story never gets old. Forms and formats do; customs that help today can distract tomorrow. What is fresh and contemporary can very quickly become the tradition that stagnates. The church that focuses on the past never moves forward; the church that focuses on the present has no stability or staying power for the future. John R. W. Stott quotes W. R. Inge, “If you marry the spirit of your own generation, you will be a widow in the next.” Indeed.

The key for the church is remaining committed to old, old story that remains forever new. Jesus. The God who became flesh and lived among us. To focus on Jesus is to remain as relevant as eternity. So in our daily reading, we start over with the story of Jesus in Mark’s gospel. May it never get old.

The Agony of the Cross

The highest grossing R-rated film of all time is Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. It wasn’t R-rated because of language—the whole movie was in Aramaic and Latin (with English subtitles). It was rated R because of the excessive violence— excessive because crucifixion was obsessive. The movie opens with the lone figure of Jesus in prayer Gethsemane gently rocking back and forth overcome with deep emotion. As the camera zooms in, we see that his face is covered in droplets of blood-tinted sweat. That picture comes from Luke 22:44--

And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.

The Greek word for "anguish" is "agonia" from which we get "agonize." Jesus was in agony as he contemplated what would happen the next day. Here’s my question, “Why was Jesus in such agony?” Well, duh! He was about to die a horrible and painful death! He knew what would happen the next day.

But there is more to it. During the reign of Emperor Severus in the third century, a young woman from Alexandria named Potamiaena was condemned to die as a Christian. She underwent days of torture and abuse before eventually being burned alive by having boiling pitch poured over her body. And yet her faith and disposition while awaiting and enduring her horrible death led her jailer to Christ. This young girl and thousands like her faced martyrdom in horrible ways in the name of Christ with a calm faith and quiet acceptance.

So why did Jesus claw the ground in Gethsemane? I am not suggesting that we minimize the physical torture Jesus endured; it was every bit as horrible as we saw in Gibson’s movie. But how did so many martyrs face their own horrible deaths with quiet calm and serenity? What Jesus faced on the cross was more than just the pain of physical crucifixion. Jesus would carry our sin with Him on the cross. Jesus would feel the desolation of separation from God caused by our sin. That was the meaning of Jesus cry from the cross—“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me.” Because of our sin, God said “No” to Christ's Gethsemane prayer for deliverance. Because of our sin, God allowed His son to die rejected and alone. The veil in the Temple was not the only thing rent when Christ died; the perfect unity between Father and Son was also rent, torn apart by the rebellion of our sin.

So here is the irony. Paul says, “God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ” (2 Cor. 5:19). God was bringing us back to Himself through the cross, but in order for Him to do so, He had to abandon Jesus on the cross. God “made him who had no sin to be sin for us” (2 Cor 5:21). Because in that one moment in time Jesus became our sin, then in that one moment in time, God turned away from Him. In order for us to be reconciled, God rejected His Son. During those dark hours on the cross, Jesus was all alone. Why had God forsaken Him? It was because of our sin... and because of our salvation.

He Saved Others...

It had been too easy. They captured Jesus without a fight. They rushed him through their kangaroo court and had him quickly condemned by the Romans. Oh, sure, they had to manipulate Pilate a bit. Manipulating the crowds was even easier-- the same mob that shouted and worshiped him scarcely a week before had now cried, "Crucify him!" It had all been so easy. And now they were there to enjoy their day of victory.

So these leaders of the Jewish people-- priests, scribes and elders-- were there at the cross to watch this Jesus of Nazareth die. Their hearts were filled with no remorse and no guilt. They had nothing but bitter hatred and contempt for this man who had made their lives so miserable for the last three years. Now these important men who had used their important positions to mask their evil deeds gloated in their victory. And they shouted insults at the man who suffered on the cross.

It is hard ti even imagine the cruelty of that act. How could men who claimed to be religious leaders be so cold and cruel to insult a suffering, dying man. The churchmen and political leaders who manipulated evidence to condemn Joan of Arc openly wept and begged her forgiveness as she was burned at the stake. “We are undone,” one cried, “for we have murdered a saint.” But there is none of that here. There was no trace of regret or remorse expressed by the men who killed Jesus. Instead, they taunted him (Matthew 27:41-43, The Message)

The high priests, along with the religion scholars and leaders, were right there mixing it up with the rest of them, having a great time poking fun at him: “He saved others—he can’t save himself! King of Israel, is he? Then let him get down from that cross. We’ll all become believers then! He was so sure of God—well, let him rescue his ‘Son’ now—if he wants him! He did claim to be God’s Son, didn’t he?”

"Having a great time poking fun" at a tortured and dying man? .Not of one of them saw the horror of their deed. Not one of them noticed as the lips of the dying moved in prayer, “Father, forgive them; they don’t know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34).

And not one of them knew how right they were! To save others, he could not save Himself! And so He died. And the gates of hell were torn off their hinges!

Are You a Peter or a Judas?

I’m trying to keep my reading from Matthew 26 straight—Judas betrayed Jesus and Peter denied Jesus. Right? Judas didn't really deny Jesus; he acknowledged him with a kiss (Matt 26:49). But Peter denied that he even knew Jesus... three times… with a curse (Matt 26:74). The stories of these two men sound virtually identical up to this point of the story.

• Both men spent over three years following Jesus and had the inside scoop on His teaching and miracles.
  
  
• Both men were warned by Jesus of their upcoming failure (Matt 26:25,34).
  
  
• Both men were very sorrowful when they realized what they had done (Matt 26:75, 27:4).

And Peter received the keys of the kingdom of God (Matt 16:18) and Judas would have been better off if he had never been born (Matt 26:24). OK, the two stories were very similar until we get to that last picky point.

Why such a dramatic divergence of stories? Was what Judas did really so much worse than what Peter did? Judas identified Jesus to his enemies, but even Jesus noted that this was a more a symbolic than a disastrous betrayal. Jesus told those who arrested Him “Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me.” (Matt 26:55). His enemies knew who Jesus was, though perhaps the soldiers who arrested Him needed a positive ID. Couldn't some of the Pharisees have told them in advance, "Jesus will be the one with the halo?" What the soldiers really needed was someone (Judas) to tell them when Jesus was alone and could be taken in secret so the crowds could be manipulated. But they could have just followed him around!

Jesus could have been arrested without Judas, but Peter’s denial must have went straight to Jesus’ heart. Here was his friend who one minute proclaims “Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you” (Matt 26:35). The next minute he is calling down curses on himself saying “I don’t know the man!” (Matt 26:74). How did Peter take an oath or call down curses? "I swear to Him, I don’t know Him!” That flip-flop was all in the same half-chapter!

Before we shake our heads at Peter’s flip-flop, we need to look back at our own flip-flops. Have you ever gotten in a difficult situation and acted as if you didn't know Jesus? Have you ever decided that it was easier to just go along to get along and let people believe that you aren't one of "those Christian-fanatic" types? Have you ever given a wink and a nod to some action that you know Jesus would not condone because it was easier than taking a stand? If you admit that this has EVER been you, then welcome to Peter’s world. If you say that you have NEVER done that… well, you’d probably lie about others things too!

Why was Peter forgiven and Judas not? OK, I’m assuming that Judas wasn’t forgiven, which isn’t my place to assume—though Jesus’ statement “would be better for him if he had not been born” sorta leaves an impression, right? What was so much worse about what Judas did and what Peter did… and what you and I have done? Judas GAVE UP and Peter GOT UP. Judas killed himself. Peter repented, accepted forgiveness and then on to live the faith he once denied. Giving in and giving up are not the same thing!

So… you gonna be a Peter or a Judas?

Lend Me Your Ear...

In Matthew 26:51, Matthew tells what happens when the soldiers actually stepped forward to arrest Jesus, "With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear." This is one of those stories that all four of the gospel writers cover, so it must be important. John fills in the names of the disciple (Peter) and servant (Malchus). Luke fills in the detail of Jesus performing reattachment surgery on the ear. He also informs us that it was Jesus' idea that Peter go to the garden armed in the first place (Luke 22:38). But all four writers tell about one of the apostles cutting off the ear of the servant of the High Priest.

How do you imagine this story playing out. The picture at right has Peter grabbing the guys and intentionally sawing off his ear. Is that how you imagine it happening?

• Did Peter wake up out of a deep sleep and just lash out when he realized the enemy was upon them?
  
  
• Did Peter spin around like Luke Skywalker and take off the guys ear to show how good a swordsman he was?
  
  
• Was Peter aiming at the guys head and take of his ear because Peter wasn't such a good swordsman at all?
  
  
• Did Peter target the servant of the High Priest because it was High Priest was causing all the trouble for Jesus?

We know from Luke 22 that the apostles had two swords. Who had the second one and why didn't they use it? Or maybe Peter was swinging both swords like a Jewish Samurai warrior?

What is the point of the story? It wasn't that Jesus heals the guy whose ear is cut off-- only Luke mentions that part of the story. The point of Peter's swordplay was that Jesus refused to allow it. Jesus told Peter to have a sword and also told him not to use it. Jesus wasn't arrested because his servants were unwilling or unable to protect him. In fact, Jesus could have called legions of angels to fight for him. Jesus wants Peter and the rest to know that His arrest, trial and crucifixion were not happening by accident. No one was taking Jesus' life; He was laying it down. (John 10:17-18).

On Missing the Point

Jerry Clower used to tell about the time that he and Marcel Ledbetter slipped into the church building early one Sunday morning and replaced all the communion juice with green persimmon wine. He said that everyone partook of the Lord’s Supper that Sunday, and then they all stood and whistled the closing hymn.

OK, my story isn't that dramatic, but the great Kool-Aid incident of 1976 almost comes close. This was before I came here, but someone told me about it under promise of anonymity. The person in charge of preparing communion evidently put off the task until the last minute one Sunday morning. When they hurriedly rushed in to get things ready, they discovered that there was no Welch’s grape juice. But there was a large container of Kool-Aid left over from VBS. If they mixed the Kool-Aid really strong, maybe no one would notice that the grape juice wasn't really grape juice. It might have worked too... had we actually had grape Kool-Aid. What we had was orange Kool-Aid, and that wasn't fooling anyone. I am told that as people partook of the cup, they looked around with extremely puzzled looks on their eyes… but no one ever said anything. They still don't!

I forgot about that story until years later when we had the great banana juice incident. We were preparing communion for the very first official service of the church freshly planted in Zhitomir, Ukraine. For some reason, grape juice was hard to find (though wine was more plentiful than drinkable water). But somehow we had it our minds that we had to find grape juice. Not long before the service, we passed a kiosk that had container of juice with pictures of grapes. The labeling was Russian, but it was obviously grape juice. Until just before the service when it was opened, revealing a bright yellow liquid and someone immediately labelled “banana juice.” We had communion, but I’m sure that when we got to the part where the cup represented the Lord’s blood, that must have lost something in translation.

In our reading for today in Matthew 26, Jesus observes “the Last Supper” with the apostles. It really wasn't the last supper; Jesus eats with his disciples several times after the resurrection. What he does is to eat the Passover with his disciples for the last time, and He radically changes its meaning and message for all time to come. The bread and wine of the Passover become a statement of the covenant of the body and blood of Jesus. Rather than pointing back to the freedom of the Hebrews slaves during the time of Exodus, now this meal points us to our exodus from the slavery to sin, freedom given us through the sacrifice of the cross. It is the sign of the covenant, a new covenant Jesus signed in His own blood and that we resign every time we eat the bread and drink of the cup.

It is interesting how divisive that communion has been through the years. It was largely a differing understandings of communion that kept the Protestant Reformation movements of Luther, Calvin and Zwingli from merging into one. In my own religious tribe, churches have split over any number of communion issues-- the number of communion cups, whether or not we can use grape juice rather than wine or MUST use wine and not grape juice, whether or not you can sing while the cup is being passed, etc. A professor in grad school told me about a church that split over whether or not the one cup had to have a handle (as in a coffee mug) or not, because without a handle, a cup isn't a cup-- it's a glass!

Somewhere along the line, we missed the point. The point of communion is not making sure we get all the details (like numbers of cup and exactly what's in the cup) right. The point of communion is NOT our cup at all— the point is the cup that Jesus drank for us. In communion, we participate in the cross and focus on what Jesus did for us there. Communion isn't about what we do but about what He did. In communion, we share in Christians death on the cross and in His resurrected life after the cross. And we give thanks. That is the point!

Are You Ready...Today?

Our reading for today begins with Matthew 24:36, “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” Jesus plainly says that humans don't know (even he didn't know as long as he was human) the time of the second coming. It will be like the flood (v. 38). It will be like a thief in the night (v. 43). It will come unexpectedly and without any warning or sign. We can’t know when Jesus will come, so if we are going to be ready when he comes, we must be ready for Him at all times. We must always and continually “keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come” (v. 42).

So then why have people continued to make predictions about the tie of the second coming? Almost from the very beginning of the church, there have been “experts” who thought they had inside information on when Jesus was coming back. I gave the following summary of some of the “soothsayers of the second advent” a couple of years ago in a blog--

• In the mid-second century, Montanus set the date for the return of Christ and the end of the world in the late second century. His followers gave their goods away and waited for the return. When it didn't happen, the Montanists were reduced to beggars and the movement ended.
  
  
• In 1524, a German theologian predicted the coming end of the world in a cataclysmic flood. He attracted a wide following, and his disciples built boats and rafts and waited for the great world-ending flood. When it didn't happen, they were so annoyed that they threw him in a lake!
  
  
• William Miller predicted that the world would end in 1843, a date he later had to revise to be October 22, 1844. The Millerites were so shocked when it didn't happen that they referred to October 23, 1844 as “The Great Disappointment.” While Miller faded from the scene, some of his followers led by Ellen G. White founded the Seventh Day Adventists.
  
  
• Some of the other ex-disciples of Miller led by Charles Taze Russell formed the "Millennial Dawn" movement. They set many dates for the end time, beginning in 1874 and then reset to be 1914, 1925, 1929, 1941, 1975, and their most recent prediction was for 1991. This movement is now called the Jehovah's Witnesses; they no longer set dates.
  
  
• In 1970, Hal Lindsey published The Late Great Planet Earth in which he predicted the second coming sometime in the mid-seventies based on the Egypt-Israeli war. The book as been revised many times because the world has changed a little since he wrote.
  
  
• And Y2K sparked renewed interest of end time predictions as the third millennium began. Not only did the world not end, but most of the lesser catastrophes that was supposed to come with the changing of the calendar did not take place.

The predictions of the "soothsayers of the second advent" always have two things in common. First, their predictions are always that Jesus is about to come some time in the near future; no one every says that they've figured out all the signs and the end is come in 1.2 million years! Second, they have all been wrong... and they will always be wrong.

Matthew 24 is not an easy passage to parse. Jesus predicts the destruction of the Temple (24:2) and then answers two (or three) questions raised by the disciples – “When will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" OK, maybe that is just two questions, but Jesus is going to answer all three. In section one (verses 4-34), Jesus is answering the first questions about the fall of the Temple. He ends with the promise “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” (v. 35). And then he moves on to discuss “that day and hour” when heaven and earth would pass away. There would be signs that Jerusalem was about to fall-- “the abomination of desolation” (or “when you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies”, Luke 21:20). But there will be no signs to read or warning to head when the world is about to end. Some of the people present when Jesus spoke would be there for the fall of the temple (v. 34). But obviously they aren’t still around waiting for the end of the world. We are still waiting, but we can’t know when that might be.

Here’s my prediction—we are nearer to the end of the world and the judgment mankind today than we were yesterday. And Jesus has given us one more day to get ready. Use it.

Whoa or Woe?

Jesus was very patient and forgiving when dealing with sinners. It fact, several times He defends sinners who are condemned by the “holy people.” Others dismissed sinners like the sinful woman (Luke 7), Zacchaeus (Luke 19) and the adulterous woman (John 8), but Jesus comes to their defense and offers them grace. Our reading today from Matthew 23 shows us the kind of sinners Jesus openly condemns—those who take pride in their own holiness. Here Jesus pronounces a series of "Woes" on the Pharisees. Why?

• Pharisees extolled telling the truth... and had a system that let them lie when they needed to do so (23:20-22)
  
  
• Pharisees focused on the external rituals of religiosity while ignoring real spirituality to the point where they strained the gnats of tradition while swallowing the camels of sin (23:23-24).
  
  
• Pharisees were so focused on externals that they are compared to whitewashed tombs and half-washed cups. They look good on the outside... but not on the inside. (23:25-28).
  
  
• Pharisees extol the memories of the prophets while acting just like the people who martyred them (23:29-32)
  

The problem with the Pharisees was not that they were such obvious and open sinners. No, the problem is that they looked EXACTLY like holy people. Their desire was to get religion right, and there is nothing wrong with that. That is UNLESS you think you have gotten it all right and are saved because it is all right. The Pharisees focused on tradition and completely missed God. Jesus told them that though they searched the scriptures, they missed the whole point (John 5:39). They got so focused on the right rites that they became dead wrong.

The main character in John Grisham's novel The Last Juror visits many different types of churches in rural Mississippi. While he notes many obvious differences from church to church, he also is struck by the central core that all shared in common. Perhaps this view from an outsider can help us to refocus on the part that matters.

The denominations were varied and baffling-- how could Protestants, all of whom claimed to follow the same basic tenets, get themselves so divided? They agreed basically that (1) Jesus was the only son of God; (2) he was born of a virgin; (3) lived a perfect life; (4) was persecuted by the Jews, arrested and crucified by the Romans; (5) that he arose on the third day and later ascended into heaven; (6) and some believed-- though there were many variations-- that one must follow Jesus in baptism and faith to make it to heaven. The doctrine was fairly straightforward, but the devil was in the details."

Yes, the devil really IS in the details. And when we fuss and feud over traditions and interpretations to the point where the body of Christ is harmed, that most certainly is the work of the devil! It is so easy to be so proud of ourselves because we are so right while others have it so wrong. Just like the Pharisees.

Whenever we get to the point where we pride ourselves on how well we do Christianity, we’d better tell ourselves “Whoa!” Or we might find Jesus telling us “Woe!”

Tradition, Tradition

I have been a Colts fan all my life—literally. I have this very clear memory of watching TV with my Dad while the Baltimore Colts were being introduced on TV. He pointed to Johnny Unitas and said, “That's the greatest quarterback ever.” I was probably 5 years old, and from that moment on, I was a Colts fan. And from that moment old, the Colts have been breaking my heart. Losing to the Jets in 1969. Bert Jones and the overtime loss to Raiders in 1977. Sneaking out of town under the cover of darkness for Indianapolis in 1984. I tried to be a Steeler’s fan when they were winning and a Redskins fan when they were winning. And I was a 49ers as long as Joe Montana was the quarterback. But my heart always belonged to the Colts… and they kept breaking it. So last night was nothing more than the continuation of a longstanding tradition. Sigh.

Speaking of tradition, our reading for today in Matthew 23 has Jesus begin to pronounce a series of woes on the Pharisees. Their slavish following of a received tradition caused them to “shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces” and “travel over land and sea to win a single convert.” Their tradition was making it harder and harder for people to see and follow God. Their tradition was at the same time a series of rules and regulations that enforced spirituality on people and it was a series of dodges and loopholes that allowed them to act as they pleased. And Jesus wants them to know that God is not pleased.

Now, tradition itself is not a bad thing. The now famous quotation from Jaroslav Pelikan affirms the basic truth, "Tradition is the living faith of those now dead. Traditionalism is the dead faith of those still living." We do indeed learn from the faith of those who go before us. Tradition, both that of historic Christianity and that received from our immediate mothers and fathers in faith, can help to give our faith substance and expression. But that can be a double-edged sword if we do not keep our eyes on Jesus. J. I. Packer says this--

All Christians are at once beneficiaries and victims of tradition—beneficiaries, who receive nurturing truth and wisdom from God’s faithfulness in past generations; victims, who now take for granted things that need to be questioned, thus treating as divine absolutes patterns of belief and behavior that should be seen as human, provisional, and relative. We are all beneficiaries of good, wise, and sound tradition and victims of poor, unwise, and unsound traditions.

We decide whether our received traditions are a blessing or a curse to us. If they nurture and inform us as we seek Christ, then they are a blessing. But if they cause us to judge others and keep us from reaching out to all others who seek the Christ, then our tradition is our curse. When tradition points to Jesus, it is doing its job. When tradition points to itself and isolates believers, then tradition is doing the work of the evil one.

The Dress Code

One of the things that has definitely changed about church is the way people dress. Back in the olden days, everyone was expected to dress in their “Sunday-go-to-meeting” finest. All the women wore nice dresses and hats; all the men wore suits and ties. Everyone just knew that you showed respect for God by wearing your best clothes for Him. Everyone just had to know that, because they wouldn't read it in the Bible! The Bible doesn't have a dress code. Well, there is Exodus 28:42-43 that tells Aaron and his priests to make sure they are wear underwear when they are on duty. But aside from that, there is no dress code.

We don't really honor God by dressing up in our Sunday nest. In fact, James warns us not to judge others based on how they are dressed for church (see James 2:1-4). We had a church deacon who insisted that every brother who waited on the table wear a tie, and kept spares ties (very ugly ones) here at the building just in case someone forgot theirs.

I am much more comfortable with our current “come just as you are” dress code. I do try to wear a tie every other month or so, just so I don't forget how to tie one. Of course, some of our men still wear ties. Some don't. Some of our ladies still dress up; some come dress more comfortably. That's perfect-- not matter how our guests comes dressed, there will be some of our members dressed exactly like them. No one has to feel uncomfortable.

Our reading today from Matthew seems to suggest that God may after all have a dress code which is rather rigorously enforced. In the “Parable of the Wedding Feast” (Matthew 22:1-14), Jesus tells a story about a king who throws a party for his son and invites the guests to come. There is something strange about the guest list—

• The ones invited don’t come. The invitation went out throughout the land for the guests to come to the king’s party, and everyone was too busy to go. They made excuses and even killed the king’s messengers. The ones you would think would be at the party weren’t there.
  
  
• The ones not originally invited were then invited. The king’s servants were sent out into the streets to invite warm bodies to fill seats at the table. The common folks and street people—the last you would expect at a royal banquet—we the very ones present.

Jesus had just talked about how the chief priests and Pharisees had rejected the Christ and therefore would be rejected (see Matt 21:43-46). This parable reinforces that fact. The tax collectors and Gentiles would sit down at the table of God. “The last will be first and the first will be last” (See Matt 19:20, Matt 20:16).

But the parable does end simply making the point that some of the last people you’d expect to be a the party would be there. It also makes the point that those who come to the party are expected to behave like they are at the party. There is, after all, a dress code! Look at Matthew 22:11-14—

11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12 ‘Friend,’ he asked, ‘how did you get in here without wedding clothes?’ The man was speechless. 13 “Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ 14 “For many are invited, but few are chosen.”

There was a guest at the party not wearing the wedding garments provided by the king. If you are going to be present in the presence of the king, then you had better act like you know what that means. It’s one thing to accept an invitation you don’t deserve; it’s another thing to act like you don't appreciate the invitation!

We don’t deserve to be invited to the King’s party. But once we are there, we have to wear the right clothes. Paul says “for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ” (Gal 3:27). When we accept God’s grace, we accept that He calls us to live a certain way. We are to, as it were, dress up in His holiness. Paul says “as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.” (Col 3:12). We can’t deserve salvation, but once we are invited to the party, we have to observe the dress code. If we don’t, we may find ourselves escorted outside, and that’s a place we don’t want to be!

The Kingdom of Heaven

The Jews of the first century were focused on a “Messianic Expectation.” They believed that the time had come for God to send His Messiah who would throw off Roman chains and restore the kingdom of Israel to its glory years under David and Solomon. The Messiah would be like King David—a great warrior who would destroy the enemies of God. He would also be like King Solomon—exercise great power and exude great prestige. When John and Jesus began to preach “The kingdom of heaven is near” (Matt 3:1, 4:17), the Jews assumed that the time of revolution and conquest had come.

What do Christians today believe when they are told “The kingdom of heaven is at hand?” Many Christians long for a time when we elect Christian people who will effect godly laws so that our country can be the Christian nation it was meant to be. Has America (or any nation) ever been a Christian nation? Is that even possible? Christians are those who follow the teaching of Christ—teachings like “turn the other cheek.” Can any nation really do that? Granted, America’s tendency to rebuild countries that attack us-- after we bomb them back into the Stone Age-- is kinder and gentler than many conquering countries in history. But is it Christian? Political, economic and military power is part of the kingdoms of men, not the kingdom of God.

In our reading for today, Jesus draws a contrast that forever remains fixed between the kingdom of God and kingdoms of man. These two kingdoms operate on totally different principle, and those seeking to live in the Kingdom of God must be extremely careful. Here’s what Jesus says in Matthew 20:25-28.

Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

The principle that drives the kingdoms of man is POWER. Kingdoms use power to protect its interests, to punish those who would violate its interests, and to enforce its will to secure its own selfish interests. We heard a lot of talk about “punishing evildoers” as we invaded Iraq, but we also heard a lot of talk about “protecting the interests of the United States.” There were plenty of evildoers in Rwanda, but we invaded Iraq because of our own selfish interests--OIL. Hey, I’m not suggesting that this was wrong— but it isn't Christian. The use of POWER is a characteristic of the kingdoms of man.

The principle that drives the kingdom of God is SACRIFICE. In God’s kingdom, you don’t kill for yourself but die for others. Greatness is not about using power to protect one’s own self-interest; it’s about serving others even when that puts you at a disadvantage. The one who is greatest in the kingdom of God is the one who looks the most like the Messiah of God. The use of power is simply not a characteristic of the kingdom of heaven.

Does this mean that Christians shouldn’t serve in the military, serve as police officers, run for public office or get involved in political action at the local, state and national level? David Lipscomb thought that is exactly what it means. I don't think so. What did John the Baptist tell soldiers who came to him asking what to do to prepare for the kingdom of God. John answered, “Don’t extort money and don’t accuse people falsely—be content with your pay” (Luke 3:14). In other words, don’t abuse your power. Christians in positions of power must understand that power is a fundamentally part of the kingdom of man and incompatible with the kingdom of God. The historian Lord Acton once said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." William Pitt, who knew something about power as Prime Minister of Great Britain (1766-1778) agreed that, “"Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it."

When I use my influence, position, rank, status or reputation to enforce my will and get my way, that is using power. When I give up myself in order to seek the good of others, that is the way of the kingdom of heaven

What Good Thing?

In yesterday’s daily Bible reading, the rich young ruler asked Jesus, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” (Matt 19:16). It seems he thought that there was ONE THING that he needed to do that he had not done that would secure his salvation. He had done all the hard stuff-- he had followed the Law and kept all the traditions of the fathers from his youth. Maybe he was afraid that he had left one critical commandment unfulfilled; maybe he just wanted to hear Jesus to tell him that he was doing everything perfectly. Jesus' answer must have shocked him; the one thing that he needed to do was EVERYTHING. While he had kept the externals, his heart did not really belong to God. That is what he needed to give.

It is so easy to focus on the externals markers of religion that we forget that God's x-ray eyes look through eternals all the way to our hearts. The greatest command He gives us is love-- to love God and love others. If we focus only on the external things of religion, then we miss the one thing God real wants from us-- our hearts. There is a difference between doing religious thingsand falling in love with what is right and the One who is our righteousness. Fred Peatross sums it up like this--

The Pharisees were a deeply religious people willing to make themselves miserable for the cause. They fasted every Monday and Thursday. Possibly this had something to do with the fact that Mondays and Thursdays were market days. When the Pharisees fasted everybody in the community knew it. Their fasting became theater. They put on a benefit performance—for their own benefit.

When they gave they ignored the cultural/biblical idea of giving in secret. Figuratively speaking, they blew their horn just before they gave so everyone would notice their generosity.

Because the Jewish religion prayed every day at 9:00 and 12:00 and 3:00 the Pharisee developed a pious reputation for their frequent and long prayers. Interestingly, they made sure they were in the marketplace at those very hours. If they couldn't be in the marketplace they found the top step of the synagogue the next best place to be.

Jesus wasn't opposed to giving, fasting, or praying but he was bothered by self-righteous people. And Jesus makes the point that our righteousness must exceed the outward religion of the Pharisees.

A man who worked with alcoholics for over twenty years wrestled with why some people abstain from liquor for several years and then fall off the wagon, yet others quit and never return to the bottle. He concluded that some people become abstainers and others fall in love with sobriety. Abstainers are always in danger of going back; for them quitting is a matter of reform. For lovers of the sobriety it is a matter of the spirit.

The difference between abstaining from drinking and loving sobriety is the same as the difference between being religious and loving God.

More Than a Suggestion

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. (Matthew 18:15-17)

I don’t guess you would call be a messy person; what you would call me is a “slob.” All my life I have suffered as a “neatness-challenged” person. The biggest ongoing battle that I had with my parents was when they tried to get me to clean my room. And I would clean it, but then a few hours later it was messy again. That was a bone of contention in my marriage, and peace was not realized on that front until we moved into a house where I could have my own room that I can keep just as messy as I want. The irony is that because we bought my parent’s house when they moved back to Arkansas—the room I kept messy as a kid and the room that I keep messy now is the SAME ROOM.

I hated the idea that they expected me to make up my bunk when I went to summer camp. So my brilliant work-around was to sleep on top of my made-up bunk so I didn’t have to make it up in the morning! Just smooth out the wrinkles and I was done! I hated cleaning so much that I chose not to mess up! If my grandmother was still around, she would tell you about me stuffing my sheets and blanket under the bed and calling throwing the bedspread on top “making my bed.” I used to have a sing on my desk that read, "A Clean Desk is a Sign of a Sick Mind." At least I think it was on my desk!

The text above (our Jan 30 reading) is probably one of the most ignored in the New Testament. For some reason, we take Jesus' instructions here as mere suggestions. So when we get our feelings hurt over some big-or-small personal slight, we will sulk or talk (gossip) to other people or simply avoid the person who hurt us. We will do everything except what Jesus tells us-- to go to the person and work toward reconciliation. The reason is simple. It is HARD to confront someone who has hurt us! And it is even HARDER to do that with a humble and gentle spirit that seeks reconciliation more than "justice." Could that be part of the point?

Maybe if we were totally faithful in going to meet and reconcile with everyone who treats us badly, then maybe we would all be MORE CAREFUL with our own behavior. Face it, Jesus’ process for dealing with those who sin against us is a lot of work! If we did that every time someone offended us (or we offended someone else), we might not get much else done! So maybe we would be more careful not to allow our feelings to get hurt too easily-- or to hurt others. In other words, if we knew that we would have to clean up every mess we made in our interpersonal lives, then we would be more careful not to make a mess! It is always easier not to make a mess than it is to clean one up!

Give Us a Sign

Our reading for today (Matthew 16) begins with the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to Jesus to ask (“demand” in NLT) a “sign from heaven.” Pharisees and Sadducees were just about as opposite as they could be; normally they wouldn't cooperate on anything-- except their opposition to Jesus. Here they come to Jesus to ask to see a miraculous sign because they wanted “to test him.” That means that they were fishing for something to use against him; they were not honestly asking. I’m not just judging harshly here. If they really wanted to see a miracle, there were miracles being performed all around them. Jesus had just finished the miraculous feeding of 4000 people with nothing but single sack lunch (Matt 15:32-39). And the reason that this multitude was there to be fed was because Jesus was healing “the lame, the blind, the crippled, the mute, and many others” (Matt 15:30).

Jesus did many of his miracles in private; no one would have known that the daughter of the Canaanite woman had been healed until she went home and found it to be so (Matt 15:21-28). And sometimes Jesus told people not to let anyone know that they were healed (though they usually went out and told everyone anyway). The miracles that had just been done were very public and very amazing, and the people “praised the God of Israel” (15:31). So when the Pharisees and Sadducees ask for a miraculous sign from heaven, they aren’t really asking for a miracle-- they were setting a trap.

What sign does he give? Weather. He quotes a version of the old seaman’s weather truism, “Red sky and night, sailor’s delight; red sky at dawn, sailor be warned.” OK, Jesus' version doesn't rhyme, but the point is the same. They could read signs in the sky and know what the weather would be. But they couldn't see the signs of the kingdom of God all around them. They came to Jesus with calloused hearts and cold, condemning attitudes trying to find a way to trip him up rather than praising God because His kingdom was breaking into the world of men.

The Pharisees and Sadducees weren't stupid people… just human ones. They were so sure they were right that they weren't seeing the obvious signs all around them. We continue to do the same thing, right? How can one Christian criticize, condemn, gossip, slander, and and write another Christian up and off just because they have a different view about some issue? Isn't that contrary to how Jesus tells us to treat both brothers and enemies? But once you have made up your mind that you are right, then you aren’t really open seeing such obvious truths. The Crusades and Inquisition took place because the church became so sure it was right that it wasn’t open to entertaining the possibility that its actions in the name of God were breaking the heart of God. That is also true of so many mini-Crusades and mini-Inquisitions that take place in the church all the time.

What was the difference between the way the crowds responded to Jesus (“they praised the God of Israel”) and the way that the Jewish leaders responded (“came to Jesus and tested him”)? The difference was that the Jewish leaders already had their minds made up before they came. This is a reminder to us to constantly remain open to God and His presence around us or we too may miss the very thing that He is doing!

Speaking for God

I'm sure by now you have heard Pat Robertson's wonderfully thought out and historically researched statement attributing the devastating earthquake and the suffering it cause to a pact Haiti made with the devil when it gained its independence from France in 1804. Pat doesn't name the people who made the pack, but he does quote the devil, so perhaps his source comes fromthat side of the conversation. Here's the clip--


The question is not, "Can God work through earthquakes?" In Acts 16, he used an earthquake to free Paul and Silas from prison in Philippi. The problem comes when Robertson or anyone else claims to know what God is or isn't doing in this earthquake. I can't believe that in the guise of raising money for earthquake victims, Robertson so glibly assures the people of Haiti is really their fault.

Let's continue to pray for the people of Haiti. Let's continue to give generously. That's speaking for God. Courtney Daniels and her kids spent the last several days baking cookies and then offering them door to door for donations to Haiti relief and raising $300. That's speaking for God. Some Haitians who have nothing left from the earthquake but one potato are cutting it in half to share with neighbors who have nothing at all. That's speaking for God. But making glib pronouncements of how the Haitians have brought this on themselves? That's not speaking for God at all.

On Bruised Reeds and Smoking Wicks

In our reading for today in Matthew 12, Jesus is locked into an unusually nasty debate with the Pharisees over a healing he does on the Sabbath. I say unusually nasty debate because after they lose, they decide to kill Jesus (12:14). Talk about your sore losers! Jesus withdraws, but he doesn’t exactly go low profile— He goes around healing the sick (12:15-16). Why does Jesus heal so many sick? Is he showing His power and identity as the Christ? Not this timed— he tells the people He heals to kept his identity quiet. No, Jesus often heals the sick out of compassion for the weak. That is Matthew’s point here, and he points us to a quotation from Isaiah 42 (Matthew 12:15-21)

Aware of this, Jesus withdrew from that place. Many followed him, and he healed all their sick, warning them not to tell who he was. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah:
"Here is my servant whom I have chosen, the one I love, in whom I delight;
I will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations.
He will not quarrel or cry out; no one will hear his voice in the streets.
A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out, till he leads justice to victory.
In his name the nations will put their hope.”

The Messiah would not be a rabble-rouser in the streets who calls attention to Himself. He would rather be one who shows compassion to the broken and the weak. Matthew applies two metaphors from Isaiah to Jesus--

• “A bruised reed he will not break.” Reeds were bamboo-like plants that tall and straight enough to be used as measuring sticks and walking canes. But if one of the hollow canes became bruised or bent, then it was useless. The bruised reed here refers to weak people; Jesus was gentle in his dealings with the weak. He does not break bruised reeds.
  
  
• “A smoldering wick he will not snuff out.” Light in Bible times was provided by oil lamps, which were often little more than clay bowls filled with oil with a flax strip serving as the wick of this lamp. This kind of lamp wouldn’t hold a candle to lamps of today (sorry), but it did give off some light. If oil burned out of the bowl, the flax wick would begin to burn and smoke. It then had to be snuffed out and replaced. The Christ was gentle with broken people; rather than snuff out the smoking wick, He would endure the irritation and gently replenish the oil.

Early in the chapter, the Pharisees attacked Jesus’ disciples because they dared to pluck grain while walking through a field on the Sabbath. One doesn’t find picky technical violations like that unless one is constantly on the look for them, and the Pharisees were more than happy to point out the flaws to Jesus. They delighted in condemning the weaknesses of others… you know the type. Jesus the Messiah is tolerant of weak people. He doesn’t commend our flaws, but neither does He condemn us because of them. He came to seek and save the lost; weak and broken people are His specialty.

The church hasn’t always been so good at being gentle with weak and broken people. Someone has suggested that the church is the only army that shoots its wounded. That might be harsh; that also might be true. We need to be better at caring for the weak and broken among us because that is what Jesus did. Condemnation, gossip and accusation-- those were the specialties of the Pharisees.

Simple Faith

Pam and her husband Bob were serving as missionaries in the Philippines when she found out that she was pregnant. During the pregnancy, she contracted amoebic dysentery and became so sick that she was for a time in a coma. The drugs that were used to bring her out of a coma and to treat the dysentery were so powerful that they caused a placental abruption, a serious condition that causes developmental problems for the fetus and terminates many pregnancies. It can also be fatal to the mothers. After recovering from the dysentery, Pam’s doctors strongly urged her to have an abortion. Pam refused the abortion and trusted her baby to God. She gave birth to a normal, healthy, bouncing baby boy. Well, maybe not normal. Her son is Tim Tebow, probably the most physically dominating college quarterback the game has ever seen.

Having the abortion made sense to the doctors. They were playing the percentages and hedging their bets. Why carry a baby to term and even risk the life of the mother is you can just abort the fetus and start all over? For Pam and Bob Tebow, it wasn’t about percentages—it was about life and about God. Pam and her son Tim are scheduled to do a commercial during the Super Bowl to discuss her choice.

Faith doesn't make sense to the world. The world operates on the dual principles of science (what I see) and moral relativism (what I want). Faith drives us beyond either of those.
Sometimes faith is simply the decision to trust that God is there and will ultimately work in all things to bless those who trust Him… even when we can’t possibly understand how. That was the decision Pam Tebow made in bringing her baby to term. That is the decision that many believers are making in Haiti today in the face of unbelievably horrific suffering.

Some would see that kind of faith as childish. Maybe Jesus would agree! In our reading for today from Matthew 11:25-26, Jesus says

“I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.”

The most learned and wise in the Jewish community rejected Jesus and opposed his work. It was the simple who came to Him and were healed by Him. Sometimes faith is pretty simplistic—we decide that we will believe that God “exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him” (Heb 11:6). And we live that way, trusting God to make a difference in this life and the next.

Mercy and Sacrifice

Jesus spent so much time out eating that he developed a reputation for being something of a party guy (see Matt 11:29). Obviously, Jesus was neither a glutton nor a drunk—what got him into trouble wasn’t that he was “a glutton and a drunkard” but rather that he was “a friend of tax collectors and ‘sinners.’” And that what gets him in trouble in our text. Jesus calls Matthew as a disciple, and Matthew immediately has Jesus over for a meal with all his tax collector cronies.

The job that Matthew and his buddies had was to collect taxes from the merchants who brought goods to sell in the marketplace. These taxes went to Rome (as well as into Matthew’s pockets), and the cost of these taxes was passed onto the consumers (of course). The more taxes Matthew charged, the most items would cost people in the market. So Matthew and his buddies were not just seen as traitors to Rome; they were also the reason why things were so expensive at the local Wal-Mart!

Maybe we can understand why the Pharisees question Jesus’ choice of dinner companions. They were sinners responsible for driving up the cost of living and propping up the hated Roman occupation. Why would Jesus spend time with sinners? In a culture in which holy men maintained their holiness by avoiding the company of sinners, why would Jesus choose this of “sinners?” Jesus explains that he is the doctor and these are the very patients who need him. An old episode of MASH has Frank Burns going ballistic because Hawkeye is about to operate on a North Korean soldier. Burns says, “This man is the enemy!” Hawkeye says, “I’m going to operate for two reasons—this man is dying and I’m a doctor!” Jesus tells the Pharisees “I’m hanging out with these guys because they are sick and I’m the great Physician.”

But that’s not all he tells them. He also says, “Now go and learn the meaning of this Scripture: ‘I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices” (9:13, NLT). The Pharisees thought the whole point of their religion was religious ritual, and they were good at that. They were so good that they saw themselves as better than everyone else and more valuable to God. Jesus told them that they needed to learn mercy because that would change how they saw others. Micah long before had said that what the Lord requires is not sacrifices but “No, O people, the LORD has told you what is good, and this is what he requires of you: to do what is right, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God” (Mic 6:8, NET). The way we see other people indicates whether or not we are seeing God clearly.

How good are you are showing mercy? How good are you at seeing God?

A Seat at the Table

A friend once asked a group at a preacher’s meeting, “What is the hardest material in the New Testament for you to work through?” Most, of course, said “Revelation.” I said “Romans” largely because I was preaching through Romans at the time. He said that for him, it was the gospels because it is so hard to keep them in their two contexts. Actually, the gospels have several contexts.

• First, there was the life of and times Jesus as the story unfolds.
  
  
• Second, there is the life and times of the church 30 years or so later when the gospels were being written.
  
  
• Third, there is the life and times of the person who reads and applies the gospels.

We often what to skip the first two contexts and make an application to ourselves. We can miss the power of Jesus’ message if we fail to read it through the eyes of both the first hearers (Jesus’ audience) and the first readers ( the early church).

Take our reading for today from Matthew 8. After the Sermon on the Mount is completed, Jesus hits the ground running as His ministry ramps up into full gear. He goes all over the place healing the sick and showing the power of God. He cures lepers, casts our demons and dramatically shows His power over all manner of illness. And tucked in the middle of all this activity is the dramatic healing story of the servant of a Roman centurion (Matthew 8:5-13). The centurion asks for Jesus’ help and expresses faith that all Jesus must do is say the word and his servant will be healed. Jesus is astonished and says—

When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, “I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 8:10-12)

This story may have not had much impact on people in Jesus' day. It didn't seem to take place in the middle of a mob, and the centurion refused Jesus offer to go to his house—so it is likely that few even knew about the incident as it happened. But what was the impact on the first century readers of Matthew? These were Jewish Christians in churches struggling to know what to do with Gentile believers. Here Jesus himself not only accepted a Gentile’s faith; Jesus suggests that he hadn’t come across such great faith among the Jews. He then suggests that this will be something of a pattern for the gospel—people will come from distant places to become part of the kingdom of heaven while those who thought they had a free pass would not. What a powerful message that God accepts all people who believe on his Son. What a powerful message this must have been for the Jewish church wondering whether to accept the Gentile believers among them… assuming they heard it.

And what a powerful message for us. Jesus accepts all people who believe in Him, even those who appear to be “separate and apart” from other “acceptable” believers. Christians tend to spend far too much time deciding on who is in and who is out of the kingdom of God. Churches once even voted on whether or not to accept people seeking membership among them. Members of my faith tribe have in the past been way too comfortable deciding that they are the only true citizens of the kingdom of God. Just like the Jews of Jesus’ day thought they were the only feasters at the table. Jesus wants us to know that only God makes that guest list and that all kinds of people from all kinds of places are getting their invitation. And the ones who THINK they are the most secure in their position are the very ones who will be left out! This Roman centurion put his faith in Jesus, and that’s that gets you a seat at the table.

The Prime Directive

I didn’t see the new Star Trek movie when it made its run in theaters. That is shocking given my fascination with all things Trek. I stood in line for 3 hours to make sure I was one of the first to see Star Trek: The Motion Picture when it came out in 1979. And I can say without (much) embarrassment that Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is one of my favorite movies of all time. But, sigh, Lynn loathes anything science fiction, and I never got around to arranging to go with anyone else to see the Star Trek. I hope someone will take me to see Avatar before it ends its run in theaters. (Randy?)

In the Star Trek universe, the most sacred of all laws was called “The Prime Directive.” This law forbade any and all Federation interference with primitive, non-space travelling civilizations. Kirk and Picard were to boldly go where no one had gone before, but they could not interfere with the development of the beings with whom they made contact. And the plotline of many of the Star Trek episodes was Kirk or Picard bending the rules to find loopholes so they could save the Enterprise or one of its crew members without violating the Prime Directive.

Does God have a “Prime Directive” for disciples of Jesus that informs us how we are to deal with all other disciples and non-disciples? Maybe our reading from today from Matthew 7 gives us something of that prime directive. Of course, we don’t call it that; we call it “the Golden Rule.”

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 7:12).

Jesus says that this one statement is “the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets” (NLT). Jesus tells us that our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, and the Golden Rule is where that begins to happen. In his commentary on Matthew, France says—
The rule which follows presents in a nutshell the ‘greater righteousness’, the distinctive behavior and attitude expected of the disciple.

If we are going to live out the righteousness of God in our lives, then we will take serious this “simple rule-of-thumb guide” that demands that we ask of ourselves “what you want people to do for you, then grab the initiative and do it for them” (The Message). I wonder-- do we spend more time, like Kirk and Picard, trying to find someway around the force of our prime directive rather than looking for ways to live it out.

Getting Out of the Gunnysack

On March 22, 2006, Mary shot and killed her husband Matt. Everyone saw them as a normal and happy couple; everyone was totally shocked by the murder. Why did Mary kill her husband? She alleged that he was physically, sexually and emotionally abusive. They also struggled with constant financial difficulty. Ultimately only Mary knows why she killed her husband... and Matt is not around to tell his side of things.

How many other “perfect couples” are there like Matt and Mary? Families can look normal and happy on the surface but constantly struggle with bitterness and bickering behind closed doors. Statistics are pretty plain—if you are ever murdered, it will most likely be by someone that you love. Notice just a few statistics that I ran across on domestic violence—

• 33% of women have been abused; 30% know someone who has.
• 324,000 of women a year are abused while pregnant.
• Leading cause of death among pregnant women is homicide.
• 30-50% of all murdered women are killed by husband or ex.
• Domestic violence is a leading cause of ER visits in women.
• 50% of those who abuse a spouse also abuse their children.
• 4-10 million children will witness domestic violence this year.

We never know what people struggle with behind closed doors. You may be thinking, “But that is just people out there in the general culture and doesn’t apply to people who go to church.” Matthew Winkler was a Church of Christ preacher; his preacher-wife Mary was convicted of killing him. And no one knew that the couple had any problems. Psychologists sometimes use the term “gunnysacking” to describe the tendency we have of keeping our problems hidden from the in a metaphorical burlap bag that itself becomes an increasing burden to bear. Not only are there the problems with which we struggle, there is also burden of the need we feel to keep the problem hidden.

In our reading from Matthew 6, Jesus says, "Be careful not to do your ‘acts of righteousness’ before men, to be seen by them" (Matt 6:1). Saturday's reading covered two of those acts of righteousness (prayer and giving) and today's reading covers fasting. These "acts of righteousness" were ways that the hypocrites fooled people into believing that they were more spiritual than they really were. Hey, it's easier to pretend to be religious than it is to really do business with God.

It is also easier to fake people into thinking you have a great marriage and stable family than it is to have one. The problem is that the gunnysack we tie our troubles into always comes unraveled and those problems spill out and poison us further.

It's better to admit you are struggling than to pretend like your not. It is better to get help and find ways to heal than to pretend that you don't need to heal. It;s hard to admit that we need help, but we'll never get it until we do. "Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you." (1 Pet 5:6-7)

Fools, Idiots and Beyond

Language was something that was monitored pretty closely at my house when I was growing up. Not only would we never have thought of using a 4-letters word, we also were “encouraged” not to use words like “darn” or “gosh” because these were softened forms of curses. When I got really mad at someone, I’d might call them an “idiot.” Calling someone “stupid” was a greater offense that calling them an “idiot.” And the ultimate insult was to call someone a “stupid idiot.” I don’t remember getting in big trouble for those word choices, but I do remember one time when Mom jerked me up and threatened me with her feared flyswatter (what she used for spankings). Why? I called my sister a fool. “Idiot” would have gotten mild reprimand; “fool” put me in danger of a whuppin'. Why the difference?

Well, if you have done your New Testament reading for today, then you know the reason for the difference. Jesus said that to call your brother (or in my case, sister) a fool was to place you in danger of hellfire. “Stupid” and “idiot” and even “stupid-idiot” are one thing, but calling someone a “fool” can send you to hell. That was always curious to me, but I have never since called anyone a fool! Even people who I suspected were.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is calling us to a ethic that transcends rules and exceptions to the rules. He calls us to a morality that goes beyond that of the Pharisees, the experts in splitting hairs and finding loopholes. He says, “Unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:20). He then goes on to illustrate that ethic as He calls us to seek the heart and mind of God in doing what’s right and reflecting God glory in everything we do--

• Don’t just follow the rule of not killing someone; deal with the anger in your heart so that you will reflect the love of God.
  
  
• Don’t just follow the rule against adultery; deal with the lust in your heart so that you will reflect God’s purity.

It’s ironic that sometimes we read the Sermon on the Mount as if Jesus were giving us a new and different list of rules to follow. Jesus says “Don’t swear at all" so spend our time in Bible classes wondering if this means that we aren’t to take an oath in court. Jesus says, "Turn the other cheek" and we decide that we only have to do that once ands then we're out of cheeks.

It doesn’t matter whether you call someone a fool or an idiot. It’s not the specific word that Jesus has in mind, but the heart that gives voice to it. Listen to the “fool” passage in Matthew 5:22 in Petersen’s The Message translation--

“I’m telling you that anyone who is so much as angry with a brother or sister is guilty of murder. Carelessly call a brother ‘idiot!’ and you just might find yourself hauled into court. Thoughtlessly yell ‘stupid!’ at a sister and you are on the brink of hellfire.

This would have been terrible when I was a kid-- it takes stupid and idiot off the table too! So what are you going to call someone when you get really, really mad at someone? Well, it's the really, really mad part that is the whole point!

The First Temptation of Christ

I have mentioned Anne Rice’s novel Christ the Lord: the Road to Cana in a previous blog. The book is the second in a series of four historical novels on the life of Jesus told in the first person by Jesus Himself. Rice takes what we know about Jesus from the gospels and creates a fictional backstory that is both respectful and (usually) believable. The second novel centers on the fictional Avigail, a young woman who grows up in Nazareth… and who captures Jesus' heart. In the novel, Jesus wrestles with his desire to marry the woman he loves and raise a family. At the wedding feast of Cana, Jesus does more than just turn water into wine—he marries off Avigail and leaves with his disciples to walk the road that will lead to the cross. In the novel, Jesus handles the temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4, our reading for today) with relative ease compared his struggle over Avigail.

The temptation story in Matthew 4 is told in a very straightforward and non-dramatic way. If Jesus pauses or struggles with His choices here, Matthew doesn’t tell us. Satan presents his temptations, which seems pretty innocuous compared to some of the things that Satan tempts us with (stones into bread?). Jesus quotes scripture, flatly refuses Satan’s offer and then finally shoos him away. It’s not very dramatic.

No? Matthew says Jesus “was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted.” The Lord’s Prayer teaches us to pray, “Lead us not into temptation…” But here Jesus is specifically led into the desert to be tested when he is greatly weakened by a 40-day fast. I read a little too fast this morning, and it first looked like Matthew had said “he was hungry. The temper came to him…” Actually he said “tempter” as in Satan, but temper might work. I’m not at my best when I’m hungry, and neither here is Jesus. And yet He resists the onslaught of what must have been Satan’s best shot.

This temptation story should sound a little familiar. Remember the first temptation in Genesis 3? Satan told Eve in the Garden of Eden that she should eat from the forbidden tree; he told Jesus in the wilderness that He should eat bread. Satan told Eve that she wouldn’t really die if she listened to him; Satan told Jesus that he wouldn’t die if he jumped off the Temple. He told Eve that she could become like God; He told Jesus He could rule over the world’s kingdoms. The temptations had to do with physical appetite, pride and power. We recognize those, right? Those are the ones Satan uses on us!

All of Satan’s temptations of Christ also had to do with Jesus’ identity. The first two actually begin with “If you are the Son of God…” Doesn’t that sound something like a taunt? Isn’t that the same thing Satan will say to Jesus on the cross through the Jewish leaders—“If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross” (Mt 27:40). Satan wants Jesus to either doubt who He is or to give in to Satan in an effort to prove who He is. But Jesus knew who He was, and that’s what allows him to overcome the temptation so powerfully. Jesus told Satan “No!” and Satan left Him.

Here’s a thought—maybe we would do better at resisting Satan’s temptations if we would at all times remember who we are!

Fruit of Repentance

“People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan. Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? ” (Matthew 3:5–7, NIV)

I don’t intend to emulate the ministry strategy of John the Baptist. OK, maybe I could get a camel hair blazer, but the locust and wild honey thing isn't happening. (I just started WeightWatchers, and I have no idea how to calculate points for locusts anyway!) There was something powerful about John’s message; he didn't come charging in from the wilderness to the city like Old Testament prophets like Amos. No, people went from the cities into the wilderness to hear him preach. In fact, they flocked in droves. There was something powerful and magnetic about his message—John wasn’t just telling people what they wanted to hear. His basic message was, “Repent!” That’s never really what we want to hear, is it?

What struck me in our reading for today was John’s response to the Pharisees and Sadducees who also came out to the wilderness. John immediately condemned them as a brood of vipers? Why? Well, he was preaching a message of repentance and they needed to repent… and they weren’t there to repent. We need to understand that Pharisees and Sadducees seldom attended the same events—they were on opposite ends of Jewish culture. The Sadducees were theologically liberal and politically connected; the Pharisees were strict conservatives who stood apart (or above) from politics and culture. They did not get along, but they went along to see John. But when John saw them, he immediately attacked their hypocrisy and demanded they show fruits of repentance. Shocking? Not really—John had been demanding that everyone repent. The difference was they the religious leaders didn’t think they needed to repent.

The obvious question here is “Do were have more in common with the crowds who heard John, repented of their sins and were baptized by him or with the Pharisees and Sadducees who wrapped themselves in their own mantles of religiosity and tradition?” Are we really showing the fruits of repentance in our lives as we seek to change (that’s what “repent” means). Or do we point to our religiosity (going to church?) and righteousness (going to the right church?) as proving that we are already pretty good people already.

The message of John is summed up “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” (Matthew 3:1). Matthew sums up the teaching of Jesus as “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” (Matthew 4:17). The challenge we face as we read this is in remembering that they are talking to us!

Survivor: I-81

The “Survivor” finale was last night. I’m not talking about the TV show; I’m talking about real reality show “Survivor: I-81.” Angelynn, along with sidekicks Hannah Bean and Marley the dog, was among the thousands of travelers stranded on I-81 in western Virginia this weekend during the great blizzard of 2009. Her 17-hour trip home from Harding for the holidays turned into a 3 day ordeal right our of "Planes, Trains and Automobiles."

Angelynn left Searcy early on Friday morning, picked up Hannah and was planning to make it home late Friday night. Then the snow hit, I-81 was shut down and I found them a hotel (pet-friendly, of course) in Abingdon, VA. They left by 8:30 a.m. Saturday morning, and by 5:30 p.m. that afternoon, they had gotten only to Salem— stretching a 2-hour trip of 120 miles into an 8 hour ordeal punctuated by getting sideswiped by tractor-trailer driven by an idiot who tried to blame Angelynn. Fortunately, no one was hurt and the car remained drivable. Unfortunately, they were still a long way from home on an interstate that was again closing down.

Again, I was able to find them a (pet friendly) motel right on the interstate that had a vacancy, which was pretty amazing given the numbers of stranded travelers. Well, the reason there as a vacancy at this particular hotel was that it was on the top of a mountain that could not be climbed without 4-wheel drive. (It didn't say anything about the hotel's elevation on the internet). The Taurus, still whimpering from its run-in with the 18 wheeler, refused to climb the hill, so they had to park the car on the side of road and go mountain-climbing on foot.

Sunday morning, of course, the car was completely stuck in the snow, and they had to be rescued by some nice folks driving by. They finally got in last night… some 48 hours later than their original ETA. What an adventure! I’m very proud of Angelynn for enduring and prevailing during this very stressful ordeal. I guess we will all pay closer attention to the weather reports next time.

God's Guarantee

There’s an old story about the guy driving his 20 year old Rolls Royce in a whirlwind driving tour across Europe. (Disclaimer: This did not happen to me personally; I have never driven my Rolls across Europe). As he was winding through the mountains in Switzerland, a suspension spring broke on the car, leaving him stranded. He called the dealer in London who called the Rolls Royce factory. They immediately flew a technician to Switzerland and arranged for the Rolls owner to spend the night in a local 5-star hotel. The next day, the car was fixed and the man was on his way. The Rolls owner begins to wonder just how much all this star treatment is going to cost him. But months go by and he never gets a bill. He finally calls Rolls Royce and asks when they are going to bill him for the repaired suspension spring. He Rolls agent replied, “Sir, there must be some mistake; suspension springs never break on a Rolls Royce.”

Isn’t it great that a manufacturer would stand behind their product like that? Isn’t it sad that you have to buy a Rolls Royce to get that kind of support? In case you are wondering, a brand new Rolls Royce Phantom costs $380,000 to $450,000 depending on options. I guess if you want the map light, you gotta pay extra!

I just ordered new glasses on Tuesday. For the second time in less than a year, the fancy designer frames I bought at a national optometry store broke. (I refuse to name the store, though probably if you really focused “national optometry store” in the previous line, you might be able to figure it out). They broke in the exact same place and same way—the thick temple piece is actually attached to the hinge by a thin little wire about half as thick as a paper clip that is about as durable. Good news is that the glasses were under warranty. The bad news is that warranty means I could buy a new pair at 60% off retail. I did that once, This time the lenses had become discolored to the point they needed to be replaced to. The good news is that they were guaranteed too. Bad news was that again the guarantee was 60% their retail price. In other words, it was cheaper to go to the discount eyeglass place that opened down the street and buy all new glasses. That's what I did. My warranty guaranteed that I could buy the same defective glasses for 10% MORE than a whole new pair somewhere else. Some guarantee!

God gives us a guarantee that is a real guarantee—He gives us the guarantee of Himself. This time of year, the reminders of God’s sojourn in flesh and blood are all around us. We see tiny porcelain babies and mangers on tables and giant plastic ones in front yards. They remind us of the truth that God became flesh and lived among us as one of us. John puts it this way—

He came into the very world he created, but the world didn’t recognize him. He came to his own people, and even they rejected him. But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God.” (John 1:10–13, NLT)

The one who created the world of flesh became part of that world so that we might be reborn of something beyond the flesh. The baby born in Bethlehem was the Son of God, and He gives us the opportunity to be reborn as the children of God. And not only did God gives us the gift of Himself in Jesus, He also gives us the gift of His Spirit. This is the guarantee—

“Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.” (2 Corinthians 1:21–22, TNIV)

The God who came to earth to live among us also comes into our hearts to live in us. He gives us the guarantee of Himself. The word “guarantee” in the NIV/ESV or “pledge” in the NASB is the Greek word arrabōn. It represented a partial down-payment that guarantees a full payment in the future. God has given us Himself in part to guarantee that one day we will have Him in full. That sounds like a guarantee we can live with… and can’t live without!

Jesus Is the Reason...Period

Well, I think we are just about ready for Christmas. All the gifts are bought and boxed and… (oops, I was supposed to mail them yesterday!). Well, the decorations have all been put up… two strands of lights outside and a scrawny Wal-Mart tree inside. Angelynn gets home Friday; she’s the one who usually puts us all up the decorations, so she can take over. But maybe not so much this year-- Marley (her 100 lb German shepherd) probably would eat the decorations… and maybe even the tree! At any rate, I think we’re ready for Christmas. I am glad that this season of the year only comes once a year.

That is one of the problems with our traditional observance of Christmas. It is so seasonal. Most of the things we do during this time of the year we only do during this time of the year. It’s hard to get a good cup of eggnog and a decent slide of fruit cake in July. No one puts up fresh cut or fake trees in their house in March. And we seldom sing carols praising God for the birth of His Son in August. And if I preached a sermon series on the birth of Christ in October, that would seem a bit strange ("Why didn't he wait a couple of months...") . For many, the birth of Jesus and the meaning of His journey to our world is inexorably tied to this one season of the year.

I remember a conversation I had with my Mom around Mother’s Day. I remember it because we had it several times when I was a kid. I’d ask her what she wanted for Mother’s Day. And she would say, “Don’t get me anything; you just be a good little boy.” I hated that! I didn’t WANT to be a good boy; I wanted to buy her a present and be done with it! It’s a lot easier to buy some flowers or a card. Being good all the time is too hard!

The problem with the “True Meaning of Christmas” or the “Christmas Spirit” is that it seems OK to ignore them the rest of the year. Go to church, sing some carols, give some gifts, donate to charity, do some good deeds… and we’re done with Jesus for another year. If Christmas is special at all, then it must be special all the time. If Jesus really was Immanuel, God with us, then He is so all year around. If the baby in the manger really was God made flesh, then that changes everything. If it means anything, then it means everything. And the one thing we can’t do is give Him one day (or 12 days) a year.

Paul talks about the coming of Jesus into the flesh in Philippians— “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. ” (Philippians 2:6–7). But he says this to make a point. Pointing the Philippians of what we might today call “The Christmas Story” reminds them of the hold Jesus has on their lives and the responsibility they have to have His attitude in the way they treat one another—

“then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others. ” (Philippians 2:2–4, NIV)

If the babe of Bethlehem really was God in the flesh, then that fact changes more than the holiday season. It changes everything about everything. Jesus isn’t the reason for the season—He is the reason. Period.

How Adultery Is Like Cheating on Taxes

The newspaper I read every morning is Google News. OK, I’m lazy, I admit it. I could read the New York Times or Wall Street Journal from cover to cover (wait a minute, newspapers don’t have covers). But I figure that if anything has happened in the world overnight that I need to know about, it will be on Google News in the morning. It takes 5 minutes to scan down all the headlines in all the sections, and then you have a pretty good idea of “That’s the way it is…” Google breaks down the news into sections (Top Stories, US News, World News, Sports, etc.) which you can edit and rearrange. The problem is that the same stories can show up over several of the sections, so sometimes all the news seems familiar.

And the story that has been dominated Google News lately has been the woes of Tiger Woods. This story is covered in just about all the sections—Top Stories, US News, Sports (those all make sense). But there are stories in Health News (stress-related health issue brought on by extramarital affairs), Business News (impact on Tiger’s endorsement deals) and even Sci-Tech (cell phones and extramarital affairs). It’s been all Tiger all the time. It’s all so sad.

How common is infidelity? It depends on who you talk to. According to a survey done by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, about 25% of men and 17% of women have had extramarital affairs. But several other surveys put the statistics much higher (55% of men and 45% of women). What seems clear is that most marriages (between 65% and 75%) don’t survive the affair. No matter how “enlightened” our time, there is still nothing that destroys a marriage faster than marital infidelity.

I ran across an interesting statistic on the Pew Research Center website. The article is entitled “A Barometer of Modern Morals.” It reports on a study that covered wide range of moral questions and issues that was designed to give a picture of the moral climate in America. The most offensive immoral behavior was marital infidelity (88% believed that was morally offensive). The least offensive behavior was overeating (only 32% saw that as wrong). What caught my eye was what was the second most offensive immoral behavior according to the list—“not reporting all income on your taxes.” A whopping 79% of us believe that is morally offensive, more so than using alcohol excessively (61%), having an abortion (52%) or homosexual activity (50%). On the survey, about the same number of people thought adultery and under-reporting income on your taxes was morally wrong.

So how many people fudge on their taxes? Do you really think only 21% ever fudge on their taxes? We’ve had members do work for the church that wanted to be paid “under the table.” Is the average American really such a stickler about taxes that they see it as being just as immoral as adultery? And maybe that is the problem—we see tax evasion as morally wrong in the abstract, but can turn a blind eye when it occurs to us. After all, a few bucks here or there is really not so big a deal. And maybe that’s why almost everyone believes adultery is wrong but one-fourth to one-half of us are doing it anyway! Morality isn’t very useful if we go ahead and do what we think is wrong!

Solomon gives some very wise and poetic advice in Proverbs 5:15-20. I realize this is poetry, and most of us don’t do poetry, but read this very carefully and you might get the impression that Solomon isn't really be talking about cisterns here--

15 Drink water from your own cistern, running water from your own well.
16 Should your springs overflow in the streets, your streams of water in the public squares?
17 Let them be yours alone, never to be shared with strangers.
18 May your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth.
19 A loving doe, a graceful deer—may her breasts satisfy you always,
may you ever be captivated by her love.
20 Why be captivated, my son, by an adulteress? Why embrace the bosom of another man’s wife?

Maybe it’s the next verse that should get our attention when we want to entertain a gap between our moral beliefs and our behavior, “For a man’s ways are in full view of the LORD, and he examines all his paths.” (Proverbs 5:21)

When Fisherman Don't Fish

In his book In The Eye of the Storm, Max Lucado tells this great story about an ill-fated fishing trip he took as a kid with his Dad and his best friend Mark. They set up camp and were looking forward to some great fishing when a cold front came through and as a drizzling, very cold rain. They spend the day playing Monopoly and reading the Reader’s Digest...but things go downhill from there.

The hours passed slowly but they did pass. Night finally came, and we crawled into the sleeping bags dreaming of angling. Were we in for a surprise. The next morning it wasn't the wind that made the door hard to open, it was the ice!

We tried to be cheerful. "No problem," we mumbled. "We can play Monopoly… again. We can reread Reader's Digest and surely we know another joke or two." But as courageous as we tried to be, it was obvious that some of the gray had left the sky and entered our camper.

I began to notice a few things I hadn't seen before. I noticed that Mark had a few personality flaws. He was a bit too cocky about his opinions. He was easily irritated and constantly edgy. He couldn't take any constructive criticism. Even though his socks did stink, he didn't think it was my business to tell him. It was a long day. It was a long, cold night.

When we awoke the next morning to the sound of sleet slapping the canvas, we didn't even pretend to be cheerful. We were flat-out grumpy. Mark became more of a jerk with each passing moment. Dad couldn't do anything right; I wondered how someone so irritable could have such an even-tempered son. We sat in misery the whole day, our fishing equipment still unpacked. The next day was even colder. "We're going home" were my father's first words. No one objected. I learned a hard lesson that week. Not about fishing, but about people. When those who are called to fish don't fish, they fight.

When fishermen don’t fish, they fight! When the church stops looking up (to worship God) and out (to serve and teach others), we start looking inward at ourselves. And when that happens, we start fussing and fighting over issues that aren't really issues. When we were clearly focused on the cross and on reaching out to point others to the cross and to serve others in the name of the cross, then peripheral issues will stay on the periphery. It is during times of peace when soldiers get into fistfights in the barracks; in the middle of a war, you are too focused on the enemy. When fisherman don’t fish, they fight. Maybe we need to get busy fishing.

Back to the Blog

I've been a very bad blogger recently. Not only have I not written anything in a couple of weeks-- I haven't even thought to write anything. I felt really, really bad about this unintended break until I suddenly remembered that no one really reads it anyway! Sigh.

Here's my excuse-- all my spare blogging time has been taken up tinkering my recent upgrade to Windows 7 (from XP). On both my computers. If it wasn't enough to relearn the entire operating system, I also upgraded to MS Office 2010 beta (from Office 2003). That means that everything I do and have to relearn how to do it.

Oh, I also bought a car. I sold my old one for scrap. With a bad engine (the Chrysler 2.7 in it was evidently a bad engine even before it blew up), no AC and a shaky transmission, there was no real idea of repair. It left a good looking corpse though. And the radio still works. If anyone wants to say good-bye to the old Intrepid, it's still sitting down at Leggett and Jones waiting for the car crusher to put it out of its memory.

My new car isn't new... and it isn't really mine yet. But the credit union tells me that I have excellent credit (I felt good about that until I realized that what you do to get good credit is borrow money... that and repay it). So sometime in the next several days I'll take possession of my 2007 Honda CRV. Or is it CR-V? Or C-RV?

The last time I bought a car or changed operating systems was in 2000. So now that's behind me, I should be good to go for another decade. Bck to the blog.