God’s Covenants, Humanity’s Interference

October 9, 2011
Genesis 15-17

Class discussion was great, helping several of us think about God’s work in our lives. And then the message during the worship service reinforced what we’d been talking about. “God can do all things; no plan of His can be thwarted.”

Genesis 15-17 show God dealing with Abram and his household.

We were reminded that “a personal God” was not common in this time period. Many “gods” were worshiped, but they were separate from humanity. Worship tended to be a means of attracting a god’s attention, not a celebration of a relationship. So God speaking to Abram was amazing.

These are some of the points brought out in our discussions:

• Abram was honest with God. “You’ve promised a child. How do I know this will really happen?”
• Believing God meant that God considered Abram righteous.
• Belief is more than an intellectual understanding. Trust is involved, putting the belief into action. If we say we trust a doctor, teacher, or God, but then pay no attention to their instructions, our “trust” can be questioned. (James 2 deals with this.)
• Grace is God being good to us, though we do not deserve it. And even when we start behaving in ways that please God, we aren’t earning His blessing. We change because His grace is working within us, not only to invite us to heaven but to make us better here.
• We sometimes slip into thinking that God is interested in us obeying rules. He is really interested in building a relationship with us. As we come to know Him better, we do live differently. But that’s because He already loves us and is helping us to become more like Him.

____
NOTE: The 10/9/2011 a.m. message, "God Can Do All Things", by Missionary Dan Hopkins speaks to today's topic.

The Tower of Babel

August 28, 2011
Genesis 11

Genesis 11:1-9 is the story of the Tower of Babel. (We tended to pronounce it with a long A, as in Babe-L; but short A is also common.)

Perhaps this can be understood as a search for security. The class noted that the passage has “let’s stay together,” “let’s make a name for ourselves,” and a strong sense of “let’s build something for ourselves.” While exclusivity is not specifically mentioned, it is a reasonable assumption that the people wanted to set themselves apart from others.

What are our common sources of security? Good grades, paid-off loans, money so that we won’t be caught off-guard by circumstances, normalcy, food, and relationships were all mentioned.

Security may be defined as a lack of worry. As life progresses, the items we worry about change, but the underlying search for security continues. We are more secure when we know what to expect and can be prepared. (In side discussion, it was noted that some people carefully consider the bad things that can happen; do they also consider the good that could come?)

There is a spiritual dimension to security. In some cases, security lessens our awareness of God’s help. [Not noted in class, but Deuteronomy 6:10-12 foresees this possibility.] Increased education and wider experiences can cause us to reconsider what constitutes security for us. And the various phases of life involve changes to our perceived security.

Why did the people in Genesis 11 built the Tower for security? “Don’t mess with Texas” may be a similar attitude. There might have been a military component to the Tower; certainly such structures in that time had many purposes, and military was one. The people wanted to be significant, certainly in their own era and perhaps historically. If they could build it themselves, they’d feel secure, based upon being able to do it themselves.

Today, if we are in control, we tend to feel more secure. But God is the true security. Sometimes we seem to have more fear of other people than to have a (properly understood) fear of God.

Insights and applications:

A focus on security is a focus on a nebulous future. It removes the emphasis from today. Matthew 6:28-34 applies.

Normalcy, while helping with a feeling of security, is not necessarily good. Some things that are normal are actually bad. (Abusive situations were cited as examples.)

Our world has several ways to focus on security, but they have positive and negative sides. Medical advances are wonderful for us, but they can lead us to rely too much on “wonder drugs” (and maybe on “access to care”) rather than on common sense or alternative methods of taking care of our bodies. Technology allows us to be much better informed, but may be discouraging actual face-to-face encounters.

Security itself is not an evil. But it is possible to seek security in illegitimate ways.

There is a theological concept called “eternal security.” We didn’t get into this in detail, but one comment was made by a class member that this world doesn’t offer such a thing in any other aspect of life.

Next week, we will focus on pride itself. In Mere Christianity¸ C. S. Lewis has a chapter on pride, titled “The Greatest Sin.” We will pick up with these five statements:

1. Pride is the complete anti-God state of mind.
2. Pride is essentially competitive.
3. Pride is the chief cause of misery in every nation and every family since the world began.
4. As long as you are proud, you cannot know God.
5. Pride is spiritual cancer: it eats up the very possibility of love, or contentment, or even common sense.

The Flood (week 2)

August 21, 2011
Genesis 6-9
Handout: Genealogy: Noah & Abraham

Last week, the basic applications we found in the Biblical account of the Flood were these: Sin is serious; God rewards faithfulness.

But there are other topics covered, and the class was invited to raise its own questions. Dale shared an Illustration from his early days as a Christian. While speaking of his own conversion experience to other young adults who had known him in high school, Isaiah 53 was mentioned (along with Jesus Christ: Superstar, The Passover Plot, and The Late, Great Planet Earth. One of his friends questioned the dating of Isaiah, since some scholars thought it wasn’t pulled together as a book until maybe 150 B.C. rather than 500-600 B.C. when Isaiah lived. While even 150 years can count as prophetic (Isaiah 53 describes Christ’s role in the crucifixion), it is sometimes awkward to be hit with biblical questions that have never been discussed with other Christians.

So, even though some passing references in the Bible aren’t worth struggling with as applications to our lives today, it might be helpful to at least mention them in passing.

The questions that were raised:

• Time frames/ages of people
• Sons of God married daughters of men
• The Nephilim
• How widespread was the flood?
• And, related to this, where did the “other people” come from that Cain was worried about?
• God was grieved
  

When?

A common time frame for the Flood, by those who take biblical years at face value, is in the neighborhood of 2500 BC. However, the term translated “begat” in the King James and “became the father of” in the NIV does not necessarily mean “had a child named this.” A timeline of post-Flood ages was distributed. According to today’s Hebrew text, Noah would have still been alive when Abraham was an adult. However, closer study of older texts (and even cross-references within the rest of the Bible) shows that at least once “became the father of” meant “became a father, and eventually that child had a descendant named.” This would be like saying Melvin Jones was 22 and became the father of Mark Jones, even though when Melvin was 22 Dale was born, and Mark wasn’t born for another 26 years. But dating Mark’s age in reference to Melvin’s would omit 26 years of history.

So that understanding of “became the father of” is necessary if we want to date anything before the time of Abraham. And what it means is that at least that many years elapsed, and maybe hundreds or thousands more.

Where?

Archaeogical evidence for the flood in the Middle East does exist, but it seems to have occurred much earlier than 2500 B.C., anywhere from 500 to 5,000 years before.

While there are flood tales in many cultures, even in the Americas, there is less archaeological evidence for such a flood. Geology shows that most land areas have been underwater, but other theories are given for this, such as plate tectonics and drifting continents. In the Book of Acts, Jews from “every nation under heaven” were at Pentecost. But no mention is made of China (which was a distant trading partner of Rome at the time) and certainly the Americas were not included. So a “known world” theory of the flood is acceptable for many Christians.

Who?

The marriages between “sons of God” and “daughters of men” were mentioned in Genesis 6 as one reason for the flood.

One theory is that angels (fallen or otherwise) intermarried with humans. This seems unlikely to some of us, based partly on Jesus explaining that angels “do not marry nor are they given in marriage.” But it has been a theory that some have put forth.

Another theory is that Seth’s line was regarded as godly and Cain’s was not. As Seth’s descendants intermarried with Cain’s, the godly influence was lost. This is defensible, but still a guess.

Others point out that kings were often regarded as divine, and perhaps this was a way of condemning the practice of kings having harems. Possible, but again not certain.

[Not pursued much in class:] One other possibility, alluded to in one theory of the Fall, is that Adam and Eve were the representatives of a human race that already existed. This seems to contradict language about Adam being first and Eve the mother of all living, but it does explain why there were others that Cain was worried about. In that case, their descendants would have been considered godly (despite the Fall) and the other humans would not.

In any case, the Nephilim were the children of these mixed marriages. While the word means “heroes,” it is taken from the Hebrew for “fallen ones.” The “giants in the land” in Numbers are said to be descendants of the Nephilim. Goliath is considered part of that group, for instance.

Essentially, we mentioned these various theories without endorsing any of them. Most of the positions are held by various Christians, and all of the positions are problematic. If God thought those details were important for us today, perhaps the meaning behind some of those phrases would not have been lost during the intervening millennia.

How can God grieve?

There is another phrase that gives some skeptics, and some Christians, difficulty: God was grieved. That is, He was sorry that He’d created. How can an all-knowing, never-changing, all-wise God do something that He would later regret?

When our definitions of God are contradicted by Scripture, our definitions may not yet be perfect.

There is good reason for describing God as all-knowing and absolutely good. But apparently He is also capable of doing something that later causes Him regret, or at least that’s how He has it described in the Bible. We need to guard against letting our definitions limit Him, and we need to keep from thinking we can describe Him adequately.

Covenant

A covenant is not exactly a contract. There were three types of covenant common in the Middle East, according to scholars of the time.

Some were Parity Covenants. These were between equals, much like a standard contract today. “You do this and I’ll do that.”

Some were Suzerainty-Vassal Covenants, similar to Feudal arrangements in medieval Europe. The King granted certain privileges to his dukes and earls, and they swore to support the king. The same was then done between the earls and the knights, and on down to the serfs. The person with the stronger position set the terms, but was generous (at least in theory) with the person in the weaker position.

Finally, there were Grants. Usually for services rendered, the king would turn over certain lands to someone else. The grant was permanent, so that the persons receiving it could leave it to their children. But it was understood that the one receiving, along with any descendants, would remain loyal to the king granting the property.

The covenant with Noah was of the Grant variety. God was not settling a contract with Noah, nor was He setting up requirements for this to be in place. There were commands, but no expectation that Noah was to affirm his side of the bargain.

This was not the first time God had given instructions to humans. In the Garden, the Covenant might have been phrased, “This is yours. Take care of it.” In that sense, it might have been the Feudal type.

Once Adam and Eve had disobeyed, the new agreement could be seen as a grant. “Here is the way your life will be.”

Even Cain got a sort of grant from God, though it is not usually considered a separate covenant. “I’ll commit Myself to protecting you.” Later on, Cain’s descendant Lamech decreed his own understanding of God’s agreement; but God never ratified it.

In Genesis 8 and 9, God’s covenant with Noah is primarily, “This is what I’m doing for you.” It does include some instructions, but there are no particular consequences listed. Some of the instructions, such as not eating blood, sound like a fore-runner (precursor, from today’s sermon) of the Law.

(Since eating meat is particularly mentioned here, some people have thought that humans were vegetarians to this point. The phrasing doesn’t really address this, and most people have not interpreted it that way. But that is one of the “side issues” that might be brought up.)

Back to the main point: Being faithful

Gen 7:16: God shut the door of the ark. This was not something that Noah was charged with. God determined when it was time to shut out those who were perishing. 1 Peter 3:20 suggests that there was opportunity for others to be saved during the time the ark was being built. Hebrews 11:7 says that Noah’s faithfulness condemned the world. In fact, it was the world’s behavior that condemned it. God pronounced judgment on the world, but found one family that was willing to follow Him.

But Noah’s righteousness did not mean that he was perfect. He became drunk after the flood receded. Some have suggested that this was the first time the grape juice had fermented, or at least that no one had tried drinking it before. But the drunkenness itself is not the problem so much as Noah’s behavior the next day. One of his sons apparently made fun of Noah in his drunken state, and Noah’s response was to issue a curse upon him and his descendants. This cannot be the sign of a truly righteous person. We would normally consider this spite and meanness. But somehow, Noah was regarded as a God-follower and is listed as an example of faithfulness for us today.

Apparently the faithfulness God prizes is not marked by perfect living. Abraham, David, and Noah all had lapses of judgment. But they remained aware of God and stayed focused on His plans for their lives. At one point, the discussion suggested that they “kept coming back” to God after they sinned. Perhaps better is “they remained close to God despite their inadequacies.” God was not someone who invited them to His store for a new supply of grace; He was a friend with whom they lived and from whom they drew the support they constantly needed.

Discussion pointed out that obedience to God involves listening for His promptings. We stressed that Christians have the privilege of learning directly from God. We strengthen our obedience by practice.

Attitude of Christ-followers

March 27, 2011 Matthew 6:19-34 You cannot serve God and money This week we wrapped up the discussion of Matthew 6:19-34. Previous discussions were summarized. 19-21: The value of the Christ-follower is to acquire treasures in heaven. This does not ban or demonize possessions in this life, or even monetary savings for the future. But Christ-followers do not define life by material goods. 22-23: The focus of the Christ-follower is an outward purpose, rather than an inward. This corresponds to Christ's mindset. We began today's study with verse 24. Like everyone else, Christ's followers can only serve one master. In this case, we are challenged to put God ahead of money. How does one become a slave to money? Borrowing; working at the cost of daily devotions or family relationships; allowing too much exposure to advertising's influence; not being satisfied with what we have. We can dedicate our lives to wealth, or to possessions, leading to debt (loss of flexibility is a symptom). Further checks on our priorities: What do we spend our money on? When the Spirit leads, can we follow without fear? (This second question is most obvious when we are led to give money.) How can we avoid becoming a slave to money? Self-discipline can indicate how strong our ties are to any thing, even money. Deliberate "fasting" of possessions (or spending habits) can train us to keep God first. God's Word and God's messengers can help us intentionally re-focus upon God. We need to recognize the difference between "want" and "need." We need to remember that God knows what is best for us. Putting ourselves under His leadership is NOT like serving a harsh taskmaster. Beginning in verse 25, the topic of worry is addressed. The "therefore" indicates that having the attitude described in 19-24 can combat worry. Worry reveals a lack of trust in God. The unknown bothers us. We fear loss, especially loss of control. While we usually agree that God can, we worry when we are not certain that God will. And we're not certain that He will do something how and when we want. God is attentive to babies (new Christians). Next, He works on teaching us to trust. By remembering what God has done, we can recall His faithfulness. We can "set up stones," based on the experience of the ancient Jews, by deliberately reminding ourselves of His help. [Setting up stones implies visible reminders. "I purchased this plaque when God helped me through that tough situation," or "We planted that bush to remind us of how God answered that prayer."] We can also let others point out God's faithfulness to us. The rest of the passage contrasts pagans and Christ-followers. Pagans have an inordinate worry for the necessities of life. Christ-followers, with their values, focus, and following of the Spirit, train themselves to say "Lord, lead me in this. Help me to make right decisions." This is not automatic, and requires us to learn to trust Him. How do we seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness? Moment-by-moment prayer. Surrender to God. Surrender of our own image (by admitting our needs to others). Staying in God's Word. Understanding the ultimate goal, to let God transform us. ("Being" is more central than "doing," though both are transformed.) Understanding our identity in God. 1. Godly values and perspectives are not automatic. The Holy Spirit becomes a shaping influence on those who are serious about following. 2. Make the Kingdom of God the organizing principle around which life is lived. This requires intentionality. 3. "Kingdom-first living" frees a person from a life of worry and despair.

Fasting, Part One

February 13, 2011
Matthew 6:16-18
When you fast . . .

David began the session with a quick review of the Sermon on the Mount to this point. Chapter 5 was largely composed of "You have heard that it was said" followed by "But my followers will do this instead." These were focused on ethical issues. In Chapter 6, Jesus has described some religious practices. Some people use their charitable giving to attract attention to themselves. Jesus gave His followers new instructions. Then He described how some religious people handled prayer. Again, He gave new instructions, including what we call the Lord's Prayer.

Today's section describes how some people fast. But His followers are to do it differently.

How do some people fast?

• They attract attention to themselves.
• They try to impress others, and maybe try to impress God.

Their reward is acclaim from individuals, and that is all that their fasting will provide for them.

What is fasting?

• Giving up food
• Discipline of abstinence
• Hard!

Is is spiritual? Or can we call it fasting if we're trying to lose weight? And if we are aware that it might help us lose weight, does it lose its spiritual significance? And that raises the whole issue of what spiritual purpose is behind fasting.

We can also fast other valued things. For instance, some people have been advised by their doctors that they must eat on a regular schedule. Fasting may be particular food items instead of completely not eating, or it may be giving up something non-food related as many people do for Lent.

"When you fast" is not exactly a command, but it is an assumption that Jesus' followers will fast. In Luke 5, verses 33-35, Jesus pointed out that His followers were not going to fast so long as He was with them.

Fasting is a focus. When we miss something, we should spend time in prayer. Essentially, forgoing a meal should give us that time for prayer instead.

Fasting is counter-cultural, especially in America. We are encouraged to believe that if we can indulge ourselves, we should.

Fasting develops new spiritual muscles.

It can become a meaningless ritual. The example of meatless Lent for some groups was given; many participants do give up meat, but don't focus on God.

Types of Fasts

• Absolute: Neither food nor water. This should not be done for more than a day or two at a time; the body must have water much sooner than it needs food.
• Partial fast: Restriction of the diet.
• Group fasts: In the Old Testament, Esther asked others to fast before she risked her life
• Regular fasts: Judaism encouraged Monday and Thursday fasts, and John Wesley chose Wednesdays and Fridays for fasting (the actual days for Wesley may be uncertain, but these were what the class recalled)
• Fasting habits or practices, such as media fasts during Lent

Fasting can reveal what controls us. Even good things can have too much control over us. "Choosing better sometimes means saying 'no' to good."

Lord's Prayer Summary

February 6, 2011
Matthew 6:9-15
Review of the Lord's Prayer

David provided a handout on the Lord's prayer. We went through the handout, and we added a few more thoughts. The sections and numbers below refer to those pages.

Introductory Thoughts

1. The Lord's prayer is not a good-luck medallion.

3. Praise and adoration are often overlooked in our prayers. We also tend to omit any acknowledgement of God's authority. It is hard to mean, "Whatever you do will be okay," but that is the thrust of "Thy will be done." We may also skim over confession; if we harbor resentment then we haven't truly understood forgiveness. We don't need to fear confession; because of Jesus, we are welcome in God's presence. Pride and self-sufficiency may keep us from God.

From the Prayer

1. The promise inherent in "Father" is hugely helpful to many with troubled pasts. Intimacy issues that people have tend to be mirrored in our relationship with God (and vice-versa).

3. The goal is to move into a trust relationship.

5. God can forget. Continual remorse (over the same offence) may be false guilt. We may have continuing consequences from our past. Not forgiving ourselves is arrogant.

6. The point of forgiving others is to release us as well. "How can God forgive that person?" does occur to us sometimes; is that righteous anger? We may be called to hate what the person did, but we must allow God to forgive and then join Him in that forgiveness. Avoid sitting in judgment on people We need God's guidance, the Spirit of truth, to reach that point. It is challenging to love onew who is doing or who has done wrong. Matthew 18 may indicate that there are different procedures for Christians and non-Christians, though the goal of forgiveness is for both.

Give God the Praise

January 30, 2010
Matthew 6:13
"For thine is the kingdom . . ."

Apparently, the ending phrase to the Lord's prayer was not in the earliest versions of Matthew's gospel. Nowadays, it is found in footnotes in most Bible translations. However, it is always included when groups pray the Lord's prayer together, as in our church each week.

These lines are referred to as the Doxology of the prayer. Doxa is the Greek word for glory, and this part of the prayer focuses on that aspect of God. 1 Chronicles 29:11 is regarded as the basis for this passage.

There are three motifs in this Doxology.

Kingdom - Everything belongs to God. The kingdom is yet to come; it will go on forever. This second mention of the kingdom emphasizes the central message of Jesus' ministry. Saying "Thine is the kingdom" expresses confidence that God has the final say-so.

Power - Control. This ascribes ultimate power to God. There is a cosmic struggle for control. This power is based on love. Jesus came to redeem and to restore. The resurrection is often considered the greatest expression of power in the universe.

Creation also demonstrated God's power. Resurrection, coming later in time, may be considered even greater since its power broke the second law of thermodynamics. (The second law, in plain English, says the universe is running down.)

God's power is also shown by reversing the human tendency to be drawn into brokenness.

Glory - Recognition of a claim. This expression of reverence is associated with light in scripture. Stories of Moses, writings of Paul, and the book of Revelation all make statements along the lines of "His face was like the sun . . ."

The Doxology states our expectation that God will hear and answer.