Archived Posts For Bible Study
the example of the cross
Posted on February 8, 2008 by Geoff Matheson
Filed Under Bible Study, Books | 3 Comments
I’ve been reading the very very good book “A Community Called Atonement” by emerging blogger/theologian Scot McKnight. I was deeply struck by the following passage:
“We are not being fair to the Pauline texts on the cross if we narrow them simply and woodenly to resolution of my sin problem. The cross addresses our sin problem - “our” in the sense of yours and mine and the Western world’s and the Eastern world’s and the northern and southern hemisphere’s problems. It addresses the world’s captivity by evil” (emphasis Scot’s)
This goes into the basket of “I know it is true as soon as I read it, but I don’t think that’s how I live”. Because I don’t think that I have believed that God’s response to the problem of the Holocaust is the cross. It’s easy for me to see forgiveness as a product of the cross, but I’m not sure that it’s anywhere near as simple or as easy to recognise that a huge part of the work of the cross is in the example of the cross.
“This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.” 1 John 3:16
“Then Jesus said to his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” Matthew 16:24
What does it mean for us to follow the example of the cross? In the christianese cultural bubble, it is so easy to see these passages as wonderful and lovely expressions of how nice God is to us, but that don’t require us to participate at all. But that can’t be what it really means to be crucified with Christ.
So what does that look like for a twenty-something IT Nerd in his comfortable 21st century existence: to die for those who are still sinners? Does this thought both excite and frighten anyone else? Feel free not to assume that I’m being rhetorical.
lay your hands on me
Posted on October 31, 2007 by Bryan Riley
Filed Under Bible Study | 3 Comments
Jon Bon Jovi, who has one of the best male voices on the radio, once sang a tune about the laying on of hands, but I think he was talking about something quite different than the subject of this topic. Growing up Southern Baptist in America, where people tend to have personal spaces and where my church was largely suspicious about anything that had the appearance of charismatism, the laying on of hands just didn’t happen.
But, when you think about those who have gone before us it seems that there must be something to a touchy-feely faith.
Think about the story of Issac, Rebekah, Jacob and Esau, with all the trickery that went into ensuring that Isaac laid his hands on Jacob, not Esau, so that the blessing would fall upon Jacob. Genesis 27.
Think of the interesting story of Jacob, now Israel, blessing Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, where he deliberately crosses his hands over so that his right hand is laying on the youngest son, Ephraim, even after Joseph tries to “correct” his father. Genesis 48.
The bible tells us that Joshua was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses laid his hands on him. Deuteronomy 34. When the Levites were set apart for the priesthood, the entire family was brought before the rest of the nation of Israel so that they could lay their hands on the Levites. Numbers 8:5-11.
These are just a few OT examples. In the New Testament, it goes beyond just being interesting that Paul reminds Timothy to keep the gift of God aflame, a gift that came upon him through the laying on of Paul’s hands. 2 Timothy 1:7. There is the difficult passage in Acts 8 where Simon the sorceror wants the ability to give the Holy Spirit by laying on hands just like the apostles did it. And, in Mark 6, Jesus couldn’t do many miracles in his home town except “lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.”
These passages really challenge me to rethink the laying on of hands. But the passage that really puts me over the edge can be found in Hebrews 6. There the author of Hebrews made me want to write this post. It is there that he or she writes the following:
Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead,
and eternal judgment. And God permitting, we will do so.
Why is this so interesting? Because the author clearly considers the laying on of hands an elementary teaching about Christ. It is included in a list of “elementary teachings about Christ” with repentance, faith, baptisms, resurrection and eternal judgment. It is basic and foundational. It is primary. It is something upon which we build.
I suppose it is one of those things that I don’t need to understand how or why it works, but I need to believe in it nonetheless, and believing in it necessarily includes acting upon it. What do you think?
is the OT a metaphor for this age?
Posted on October 8, 2007 by Gerry Beimers
Filed Under Bible Study | 7 Comments
In a comment to the post God is love. But what is love? Reinhard said, “the OT does several important things. It acts as a metaphor for this age (the time between Christ’s ascention and return),…”
I have a great difficulty with this statement about the Old Testament being a metaphor for this age. Sure, there are places where we can allegorise the actual historical story into a spiritual application, but I very much doubt that the OT is such a metaphor. Why? Well lets see if the metaphor works for example with:
Deut 13:6-11 “Suppose someone secretly entices you—even your brother, your son or daughter, your beloved wife, or your closest friend—and says, ‘Let us go worship other gods’—gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known. 7 They might suggest that you worship the gods of peoples who live nearby or who come from the ends of the earth. 8 But do not give in or listen. Have no pity, and do not spare or protect them. 9 You must put them to death! Strike the first blow yourself, and then all the people must join in. 10 Stone the guilty ones to death because they have tried to draw you away from the LORD your God, who rescued you from the land of Egypt, the place of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear about it and be afraid, and no one will act so wickedly again.
I’m scratching my head what the metaphor here might be.
Or let’s jump to the first 9 chapters of 1 Chronicles. That’s nine chapters of genealogy! I’m struggling to find a metaphor there too.
And on I could go, but I won’t. The Old Testament is about the history of God’s dealing with humanity moving from broad interaction to specific interaction with a nation that he had a special covenantal relationship with. Drilling down to his son who came to restore all of humanity. The cycle of creation, fall, redemption is played out in the grand narrative of our scripture.
The seriously brutal injunction of Deuteronomy 13 is about rigorous maintenance of the covenantal relationship. The genealogy of 1 Chron. radically demonstrates that our meta-narrative is well and truly anchored in history. These are not metaphorical concerns, these drill to the heart of me being able to trust the story of my faith.
Or perhaps you disagree?
failing sunday school
Posted on October 1, 2007 by Laura Beimers
Filed Under Bible Study, Emerging Questions | 5 Comments
Sam is a pranic healer, studying to be a naturopath, and has some church background. Whenever I take a casual shift at work with Sam, conversations tend to run down wildly complex and thought provoking paths. Amidst my questions about pranic healing, chakras, auras and enery, and his about church, Jesus, how I view God and the spiritual encounters I’ve had; we often end up taking a lot longer to get our work done.
In talking about Jesus a few weeks ago he said something I’ve been pondering over, “I believe Jesus has so many good teachings to help us live.”
In thinking on it further that evening I realized how much emphasis my church experience has placed on what Jesus does for me, an individual. We accept grace so easily, so much more easily than we accept the teaching of Jesus about how to live out the Kingdom of God practically. The phrase “the teachings of Jesus” sat with me for a long time. I don’t think I’ve ever come across something that sounded so strange in the light of what I’ve seen Christianity made out to be…. and that scares me.
The Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5-7, leaves me wondering if the eternal life we are given by Jesus actually eventuates with us practicing the life Jesus taught (and lived).
Quite disturbingly at the end of the Sermon on the Mount I came across a seemingly familiar story I thought I knew, the story about the man who built his house on the rock and the man who built his house on the sand (Matthew 7:24-27). I can still recall the Sunday school song we use to sing and to be honest I think I could pull out all the actions to it as well. But it seems Sunday school taught the wrong story. I never knew it came at the end of the Sermon on the Mount.
So what is it about? It’s about choosing God (building on the rock) or not choosing God (building on the sand), right? Right? Actually, it’s not. Verse 24 says it all, “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.” Go read the story (four verses… it won’t take long).
The story becomes even more challenging when linked with the words Jesus brings to the crowd just before it:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”
the parable of the three servants - part 1
Posted on September 14, 2007 by Gerry Beimers
Filed Under Bible Study | 3 Comments
Matthew 25:14-30 (New International Version)
This post is going to happen in two parts. That’s because you may have this parable figured out and so I don’t need to write. It’s also because I’ll lose the file if I leave it too long and I don’t have time to finish writing it at this point in time.
A few weeks ago, in a speech to Christians, John Howard referred to the “Parable of the Talents” (Matthew 25:14-30) as a great example teaching free enterprise. This nonsense got me slightly riled. Another misapplication relates to the word talent. If you check “talent” on dictionary.com, the sixth entry is “a power of mind or body considered as given to a person for use and improvement: so called from the parable in Matt. 25:14–30.” While this is indeed a current English language meaning for the word talent, the nonsense application to the parable was apparently developed around the year 1430.
So what is this parable all about? Go and read it now! Let me start by saying I prefer to call it the “Parable of the Three Servants.” It is a parable about the kingdom of Heaven (Matthew’s term equivalent to the kingdom of God), about the way God operates in his kingdom.
How would you like 170kg, 68kg, or 34kg of gold to trade with? (no wonder Howard thinks it’s about free enterprise) Anyway, if you read the text carefully you will see that the gold was not “given” to the servants, it was entrusted to them to trade for the master. The amount entrusted was in proportion to the smarts of the servant. The servants did not become owners of the gold, but it was their responsibility to trade with it. The parable focuses on successful trading by two servants and extreme caution by the third.
Jewish teachers used to say that anyone who immediately buries money entrusted to him is no longer liable, because he has taken the safest course possible in protecting the money. On the other hand, if a man wraps the money in a cloth and it is lost, then he is responsible to replace the money.
So there’s a bit of background. Tell us what you think this parable is about. I will respond with part 2 (esp. if Geoff pressures me further…).
