Death of a Small Group
I tend to stay away from topics that are too emotionally charged. I am more of the systematic type – here is a Bible verse, here is what I think it means, here is a creed, here is my polemic spew on it. But a lot of our beliefs are based on highly charged emotion, and sometimes it must come out. A lot of my criticism of Christianity is intellectual, but many of the reasons I first began to question my faith were driven by pure, painful emotion.
I used to be involved in a small group home Bible Study organized by our Baptist Church. We usually hosted it in our house, and sometimes I led it. We had a workbook as a rough guide, and since I thought the book was rather tepid, I liked to venture into gray areas that were not discussed in the book. This was always more meaningful and relevant for me, and hopefully challenging for the participants. We usually followed this up with prayer requests and intercessions before God.
One particular night, our topic was prayer, specifically prayer for the sick. Our Scripture was out of James:
Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective - – James 5:13-16 (NIV)
One of the members recalled her deceased father. He had always been a good father, she said, and we let her speak as she shared some reminisces. Then she began crying. Why did God take her father while he was so young? she cried. He was a devout man, she said, he always obeyed his parents. We all sat and let her grieve. He always obeyed his parents, so I don’t understand why God took him so young. I don’t understand why God did not keep his promise.
She was referring to this:“Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— “that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.” - Ephesians 6:2-3, which is just a rewording from the commandment in Deut 5:16.
We heard her right. The commandment that she referred to has a promise attached. She was accusing God of breaking that promise right in front of our eyes. “Why”, she cried, “did God break his promise?”
The group collectively said nothing. No, I don’t think she was expecting answers from us. She just missed her father terribly and wanted to mourn. But I felt completely impotent. When she was done crying, she collected herself, wiped her eyes and prepared to continue with the workbook. I felt not only impotent, I felt that Ephesians 6:2-3 and Deut 5:16 were just as impotent. We could offer no answers, no support, and neither could our Bible or our faith in God. She asked why God broke a promise that is clearly stated in Scripture. Her father kept his end of the deal, so why did God not keep his end? But we dare not dwell on these things, because in the end it is all according the divine Will of God. The Will of God trumps everything.
So we ignored the whole thorny issue, said not a word about it, and moved straight on to James 5:17. “Elijah was a man just…”
That was the last small group that I led. I just could not go on with that same pious routine, which I felt was losing all spiritual relevance and meaning. Our small group just seemed to excel at passing around short excerpts of Scripture that had long since become trite platitudes that ultimately meant nothing. This was nothing new; I had experienced this sort of thing many times before. This spiritual dryness brings about the call for ‘Revival!’ amongst the truly faithful. Since we had become lukewarm and stale, it was time for a revival of the Holy Ghost, to stop being mere spectators of the Faith, and be on fire for the Word again! So Revival would begin by being more fervent and emotional in our singing, studying daily to find the ‘meat’ of the Word, more time in the ‘Prayer Closet’, secretly giving an additional offering over the 10% tithe, and more Evangelistic calls to the lost. But this time I had to face it. Unless we are some natural born Billy Sunday, this attitude just does not last. I knew that even if our small groups witnessed the most dramatic revival ever, we would still be powerless to answer a simple question like “Why did God not keep his promise in Scripture?” Holy Ghost empowers our revivals for only so long before we lose the fire and drift back into Biblical Platitude Land.
I figured if revivals worked like this, we were barely alive. “Call the Medic, The Church needs reviving again!” I know what the Christian reader will say at this point. You need more faith! You need more prayer! You cannot just try Jesus and quit if you don’t like Him, it is a full commitment! I don’t know what to say to this, except to say, to quote DagoodS, “You have no clue”. We were all committed Christians with saving faith, including my wife and myself. But I just had to face the fact that there is something fundamentally wrong with this faith that seems to be empowered by nothing but our own fervent desire, our own deeds of study, prayer and evangelism, and our own good intentions.
April 4th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
**You cannot just try Jesus and quit if you don’t like Him, it is a full commitment!** But a commitment must be two-sided, as you’re alluding to here. You didn’t just ‘try’ Jesus, you were faithful for years. If you’re told that the Bible is the inerrent and infallible way one knows God and that’s the only way you can know God and yet certain things don’t seem to add up, then what? People could say that you’re reading it wrong or you’re not letting the Holy Ghost help you interpret correctly, but you’re reading it plain as day, and yet what just happened seems to contradict God’s Word.
What happens when you feel like you’re the only one with the full commitment? Because in many ways, if this were a commitment between two people, would any of us have trusted the other person as long as this, if the commitment from them seemed vague and not living up to what s/he wrote?
April 4th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
That is heartbreaking. It reminds me of a quote by a general who worked for UN peacekeeping during the Rwandan genocide–I cant remember it exactly, but he said He’ll never forget the eyes he saw in rwanda…he never saw any happy eyes…only eyes of people (those who were about to be killed) who were so dumbfounded at how such a brutal massacre could be happening to them–a look of complete confusion at why they had to die…and those eyes never stop haunting him…
it has got to be so heartbreaking to witness that utterly honest plea to God to answer a promise–
Heather, I think you make an excellent point about the one-sided committment. It seems that christians are not as much taught how to have a relationship with God, so much as they are taught to fill-in God’s part. We learn his attributes, so we can describe him in his absence to other people…we learn his commands, so we can tell them to ourselves when he doesn’t speak to us…we learn how to dwell on him when we never have really heard from him in the first place…I don’t know. I just grew up christian and all I feel I really ever had a relationship with–was myself trying to play the God part back to me.
April 4th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
To be honest, Heissailing, I think you show more “commitment” in searching for the answers to these questions, than if you just swept those feelings and doubts under the rug and kept “living the part”. I don’t have an answer to give you, but I do respect your question. It is one I will have to seek out too. I have too many reasons to believe that God is holy and just to not search for the answer. If I didn’t believe in a God who keeps His promises, I would just conclude that He ignored that promise. If I hadn’t seen evidence that there is a God, I might conclude that there wasn’t. I wonder if there is some way that my thinking is flawed; my reasoning. I’m not sure. But I’m not just happy with, “Oh well, God must be right, somehow.” I am sure He is, but I want to know how. And I’m not just talking about an answer that will satisfy those who are willing to accept any answer, but one that will satisfy me deep in my soul - one that is consistant with the character of God; not a twisting of words.
April 4th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Heather spake thusly:
“You didn’t just ‘try’ Jesus, you were faithful for years. If you’re told that the Bible is the inerrent and infallible way one knows God and that’s the only way you can know God and yet certain things don’t seem to add up, then what? ”
Yeah, but I can’t blame them for thinking that - I used to think the same thing of apostates. I believed you were saved by the Grace of God forever and cannot lose salvation. Eternal life begins the day you were saved, I would say, how can your Eternal life end? So when somebody leaves the faith, (and I knew many, including my own mother) all I could conclude was that they were not truly Christian in the first place.
**************************
joeyanne answered and said unto us:
“I wonder if there is some way that my thinking is flawed; my reasoning. I’m not sure. But I’m not just happy with, “Oh well, God must be right, somehow.” I am sure He is, but I want to know how.”
I accept and expect that if God is who he says he is, there is going to be a lot I am not going to understand. If somebody presented me with a God I could fully understand, I would not believe it, because that would be no better than worshipping … I dunno… David Koresh or something. That never presented a problem with me. I guess one of the biggest problems, and most painful problems is when God does not act like he said he will. I have mentioned it in several articles already, where God, thorugh the Bible makes very clear promises, promises that would be most evident if they were kept, and us humans place great faith in those promises. Then when they fail, we are just at a loss. When that disappointment sets in, it has because our faith in God is failed us. But we dare not question because.. because he is God! So we just have to trust that God knows what he is doing, even though it seems he is going against his very Word. What are us humans to do?
“but one that will satisfy me deep in my soul - one that is consistant with the character of God; not a twisting of words.”
Very smart.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
**“Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— “that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.” **
Hi, HIS, I thought I’d point out the word “may”. God didn’t break His promise, but His suggestion. Now we see that folks who have a bad relationship with Mom and Dad nowadays are almost exclusively curmudgeons (grumpy, rambunctious older folks), and few curmudgeons live to be 90. Someone who honors their mother and father is a positively charged person, no? This is tied to longevity.
If I’m missing something, let me know.
April 5th, 2007 at 1:59 am
I looked up the word ‘may’ on the online dictionary. Overall, the usage seems to go beyond ’suggestion’ though, and more like expected outcome, and thus stronger than just a suggestion, and getting a lot closer to a promise. If you honor your father/mother, the expected outcome is the long life.
1 a archaic : have the ability to b : have permission to : be free to — used nearly interchangeably with can c — used to indicate possibility or probability — sometimes used interchangeably with can — sometimes used where might would be expected
2 — used in auxiliary function to express a wish or desire especially in prayer, imprecation, or benediction
3 — used in auxiliary function expressing purpose or expectation or contingency or concession or choice
4 : SHALL, MUST — used in law where the sense, purpose, or policy requires this interpretation
April 5th, 2007 at 3:10 am
This is interesting, and reminds me of something I, unfortunately, realized late in my life. If we trust ourselves to build relationship with God, i.e. “my faith, my commitment, my belief, etc.”, we will always fall short. Deep down, we know we can’t trust anything we do. We will always fail ourselves, and this will always lead to doubt in our relationship with God. This is no good. No good at all.
Thing is, relationship with God is not about us at all. He came to us (whether we come to Him or not). He is commited to us (whether we are committed to Him or not). It’s all about Him, and what He, so lovingly, revealed to us on the cross of Christ. In that incredible act of supreme mercy, He built a permanent bridge to us, and brought us across it! Relationship with Him is not up to us at all! He did it, and it is finished! Know that! Live in that! Enjoy that!
We can only be committed to someone who does not require commitment. We can only love someone who loves us whether we love them or not! We will only find ourselves drawn to someone who is completely safe. If we can’t trust God completely, we will have to figure out ways to “push” ourselves to Him, and will never feel His draw, and will always fail in our mission.
Unless we change our minds about “who God is”, we will never realize our connection to Him. We will never be settled in “who we are in Him”, and we will never know His inexplicable peace. If relationship is up to us, our minds can never be saved from the doubts and fears we carry deep inside.
I say “repent”! Change your mind about God, and find the abundance of Life that He intended for you all along! Rejoice in the knowledge that His love goes far beyond your shortcomings and mistakes! Learn that He is safe, and can be trusted! It’s not up to you at all. He already did it, now you get to enjoy it! Yahoo!
April 5th, 2007 at 3:51 am
Jim Jordan sez:
“Hi, HIS, I thought I’d point out the word “may”. .. .If I’m missing something, let me know. ”
Yeah, this makes it look like I am making God define what the word “is, is”. But Jim, if you are right, then what is the point of God even stating this? God is saying, in effect “Honor your parents. If you do, I *might* give you long life, but I *might* not!” I mean, what is the point in that? God could have put anything there. “Honor your parents. If you do I may [fill in the blank]“. I dunno, it sounds kind of pointless and even shifty to me. It sounds like God is a car salesman using a an old bait and switch routine. Aloud he says, “That car may get you to New York”, but he thinks to himself, “but it *may not* heh heh heh”.
Truthfully, I had an answer ready for her had she really wanted one. I always took that original Mosaic promise of long life if you honor your parents to mean one thing - honor your parents and avoid execution. After all, what was the Mosaic punishment for being a wise guy with your parents? A good old fashioned stoning. I never took that to be a divine promise.
I could have shared that stuff with her but I did not. She just wanting to cry. Professor Theology telling her what may may mean or saying her dad avoided stoning was the last thing she needed to hear.
April 5th, 2007 at 4:25 am
Hi bruced - a couple questions for you.
“If we trust ourselves to build relationship with God, i.e. “my faith, my commitment, my belief, etc.”, we will always fall short. ”
Yeah, I agree that our own faithfulness is not at all consistant. We naturally waver. And I also know our salvation is is only by the grace of God, in other words no matter what I do, ultimately it is up to him.
Could you elaborate on these two statements:
“We can only be committed to someone who does not require commitment. We can only love someone who loves us whether we love them or not!”
“Unless we change our minds about “who God is”, we will never realize our connection to Him.”
I don’t know about that first statement - who says I can only love that which does not need my love? Who am I to think God is? I thought I had to have faith and believe, but you are saying it does not depend on that. Do you believe God saves everyone through the death of Jesus, whether we believe or not?
April 5th, 2007 at 5:22 am
I wouldn’t say that our faith isn’t “consistent”, I would say that it WILL fail us. No question in my mind. We can never count on our faith to sustain us, but we can count on His. If you believe that, it will set you free from the bonds of fear and doubt, and all that would keep us from soaring in His freedom.
Also, I wouldn’t say that God doesn’t “need our love”, I’m more inclined to think that He doesn’t REQUIRE our love. He does desire it above all else. Otherwise, why would He go to such great lengths to demonstrate His love for us?
If we are required to love, we can never know if it is real or not. Doubt sets in. But, if we are drawn to Him because He loves us… no matter what… then we then become settled in the reality that our love is purely a reaction to His love. We have nothing to do with it. If we have nothing to do with it, it cannot fail. It is a natural result of the work He began. It is not a coherced demand by an angry God, of which we must “push” ourselves onto for fear of punishment.
Know what I mean?
April 5th, 2007 at 5:26 am
Oh by the way, no I don’t think we are all saved by the work of the cross. I am sure that we are all REDEEMED by the work of the cross. And those who understand that will find their minds being saved from the doubts and fears of failed relationship with God. Eventually, everyone’s mind will be saved. Some will find salvation sooner than others, but redemption will reunite us all to the Father, and at that point, all will see the love of God, and change their minds about “who He is”.
Pretty wacky, huh?
April 5th, 2007 at 6:18 am
Bruced sez:
“I would say that it WILL fail us. No question in my mind. We can never count on our faith to sustain us, but we can count on His. If you believe that, it will set you free from the bonds of fear and doubt”
See, this is where my whole problem with this thinking is. This is really contradictory to me. You are saying that our faith will fail, but we have to have faith in his. But, I thought you said our faith would fail. If we believe we will be set free from bonds of doubt just means that if I believe I will be set free from disbelief, so you are just running a circle there. I’m not giving you a hard time, because I hear this kind of talk all the time in Christian circles, and it just does not make much sense when you stop and think about it. When doubts creep in, and they creep in for a number of reasons, I am to just ignore that and meditate that God is faithful to his Word. I did that for a number of years, we all do, but it brought me no peace. It is the equivalent of putting my fingers in my ears, shutting my eyes and humming a happy tune while my doubts harass me from all sides. It brought me no peace.
Bruced continues:
“If we are required to love, we can never know if it is real or not. Doubt sets in.”
I have to agree and disagree. We *are* required to love God. It is his greatest commandment, as proclaimed by Jesus himself. I wrote an article a few weeks back called “Why do you Love Jesus”, where I explain, among other things, that real love cannot be drawn from us when it is required of us. But you see, it IS required of us.
April 5th, 2007 at 8:17 am
I’m sorry I don’t have time to discuss this more thoroughly, but in the few minutes I have…
If we are redeemed (made complete, whole, righteous) to God, what requirements under the law are left? If we are fully reconciled to the Father, what is there left for us to do, other than rest in Him and enjoy life with Him?
Remember, Jesus spoke of the commandments BEFORE the cross. The Cross changed everything. Did the pre-cross requirement to believe produce believers? Christ went to the cross with all the world locked up in disbelief (so that Father could have mercy on all, equally). As Jesus died, not one believed. He became the sacrifice for our disbelief. He removed the requirement to believe, so that we COULD believe!
April 5th, 2007 at 8:21 am
**When doubts creep in, and they creep in for a number of reasons, I am to just ignore that and meditate that God is faithful to his Word. ** Except it seems that, based on some of the blogs I’m reading, that the doubt sets in preciously because one has read the Bible. Like the post on salvation. It’s not simply a matter of, “God didn’t answer my prayer the way I wanted/get me that raise/make things easier.” It’s more along the lines of helplessly watching suffering and begging God to help them, because the Bible says that whatever you ask for in Jesus’s name, you’ll receive. And yet the person suffers more.
Plus, I’ve read of a lot of circumstances where people start doubting because they read the OT in its entirety. Overall, the doubts start because of the Bible, and so how do you find peace over that?
**where I explain, among other things, that real love cannot be drawn from us when it is required of us. But you see, it IS required of us. ** I kind of view the commandments as guidelines, in a way. It’s God’s way of telling people, “I love you and want you to be happy. Here’s a list of things that will help you do that.” Because we can all admit that life is much happier when we don’t worship idols, or covet, or dishonor our parents. And with Jesus summing them up, it was basically his way of saying, “This is what life is: love. This is what brings you the ‘peace that passeth understanding.’
April 5th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Oh this is a deep blog - and I just have to get involved (and to be honest - I really appreciate Bruced’s focus on the gospel - it’s quite freeing).
I love how we view the bible as a ‘promise’ book - we can pick and choose what promises work for us (in this case the commandment is highlighted - about parents) and this become a selective process of sorts (highlighting the one’s that mean something to us). I am not so sure the bible is communicating this message to us - I think we might be reading some of that into the book.
Firstly, I feel sorry that the lady’s dad had to die so young and she was in pain (in some sense this is what matters here - not some intellectual BS about God). But since this is a discussion…lol. That lady had issues with her dad passing and some old hurts/pains that haven’t healed so well (or need to be further dealth with). I also think she needed to find a path to cling to find an answer - and what better answer than ‘blame God’ (HE broke HIS promise!).
But is that really the ‘core’ of the problem here - that God broke His promise? I think delving deeper into this issue can reveal a lot about what a person really ‘feels’ (and I’ll bet the core issue isn’t “God broke His promise’ - in the end this will be an excuse for something else which actually is ‘hurting’ her).
Secondly, Eph 6 passage on ‘this is the first commandment with a promise’ is a comment by the writer since it is never mentioned in the Tanakh (within the commandments or in the 37 books). For someone to interpret that as God made a promise he will never break - is adding in a little extra from their background - since the Tanakh is quite silent on this whole ideal.
Thirdly, what was the intent of the commandment? “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you” (Ex 20:12)
That your life would be long since you followed God and obeyed your parents? Or that in treating your parents with respect - you safe-guard your life and learn to secure stable friendships with your family/friends which can help enable a more succesful life (or more years in life). I tend to think honoring our parents is a healthy emotional thing to do (also good mentally) - and in some sense this also leads to less stress/anxieties - again equalling the idea of ‘prolonging life’. But are we promised a long life? No…only that your ‘days may be prolonged’ - how long does ‘prolonged’ actually mean? This is where we all guess and come to no concensus (but I like 70).
Lastly, the idea behind commandment is being totally breached here and I notice you tell Bruced we are ‘commanded’ (almost tantamount to ‘forced’) to ‘love’ God (”that real love cannot be drawn from us when it is required of us. But you see, it IS required of us.”).
I would say absolutely nothing is required of you in this faith, no way and no how and never will be. Your understanding of the idea behind ‘commandment’ is like very English to me, breux. Tapping commandment on them gives them a sense of authority and importance - ‘like this is very important to God’. Also they reveal that in the importance they are also values which need strong consideration as ‘godly’ values which we incorporate as ours. Whether we adopt the value or not is absolutely dependant on our view of God.
I think for someone to think we are being commanded (ie: no choice or anything to consider) to follow is a misnomer about the intent within the law (which was ‘it is a gift’). People can choose to follow or not - this is obvious - but no amount commanding ‘love’ out of anyone will make it so (so this means the interpretation you are using is ‘off’ - in that it makes ‘no sense’). But the idea of loving others is a high value according to God’s word (as written by the disciples) - so much so it is framed with the authority of a commandment (and is actually in Deut). Which in trn means, if I want to follow God I should start learning about this ‘concept of love’ since it seems to be something God values about us. But if you want a literal ‘commandment’ breux, I would think it’s hitting the target - just nowhere near the bullseye.
April 5th, 2007 at 11:03 am
societyvs sez:
“I am not so sure the bible is communicating this message to us - I think we might be reading some of that into the book. ”
I still think the promise was made as a lesson to the youngsters who dishonor their parents. They faced execution for breaking this commandment.
“Secondly, Eph 6 passage on ‘this is the first commandment with a promise’ is a comment by the writer since it is never mentioned in the Tanakh (within the commandments or in the 37 books). For someone to interpret that as God made a promise he will never break - is adding in a little extra from their background - since the Tanakh is quite silent on this whole ideal. ”
Hey, I’m just quoting the New Testament. The book of Ephesians said that was a the first commandment with a promise, that is as good as law to Christians. Are we as literalist Christians are to take that seriously? If not, is there anything else in Ephesians we can just brush off as ‘maybe that is not what it means’. It all goes back to the authority of Scripture -
- which, by the way, I doubted then and definitely don’t buy now.
“But is that really the ‘core’ of the problem here - that God broke His promise? I think delving deeper into this issue can reveal a lot about what a person really ‘feels’ ”
oh yeah, I am certain about that.
“but no amount commanding ‘love’ out of anyone will make it so ”
Yes I know, and I agree. That is my whole point though - what are we Christians to then make of passages like Mark12:30-31: AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.’ The second is this, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” which is just quoting Deuteronomy 6:5. OK, I take that to mean that …. God’s greatest commandment is to Him with all our heart, etc.
So this is the circular reasoning I don’t understand. We are not to have faith, because our faith fails, just believe (which is another word for faith as far as I am concerned, and is used in Scripture). So while you say “I would say absolutely nothing is required of you in this faith, no way and no how and never will be”, how do I tie that in with “You must believe to be born again”? Faith is not required …. .and yet it is? We don’t have to Love God, yet… it is commanded of us? But ‘commanded’ in this sense really does not mean ‘commanded’, it means .. what.. doing it because we love God anyway? Then if we love God anyway why does he even have to mention that we have to love him?
I have no problem with loving, that is not the point. The rest just seems like a crazy, circular word game. I think this is why most Christians just sigh, say they just believe and not think about it.
Why am I writing so much about what “is, is” today?
April 5th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
“You must be born again”… that’s right! And you were! All of creation was born again with the resurrection of Christ!
On the cross, He brought Jew and Gentile (believer and unbeliever) into His body. With Him, they (we) died, they (we) were buried, and they (we) rose again! Reborn into the kingdom of heaven, right along side Jesus!
I don’t think it’s about what we believe at all, but about what we know. Knowing that the work of the cross frees us from any disconnect with God, and brought us all into His body… draws us in. If the good news is really that good, we are pulled INTO belief. Not because of what we think we need to do, but because of what He did. If the good news isn’t that good, then it is of no value. It then places the responsibility back on us to “believe” because we have to… and that is something we are not capable of doing.
The best thing we can do is wipe our slates clean. Abandon all we believe and all we know, and focus on one simple fact… if Jesus was/is the Messiah, then all of creation is reconciled to the Father, no matter what. If that is true, it doesn’t matter what we believe. But just knowing it will draw us into the most incredible, life-assuring peace mankind has ever known.
It’s too bad the church won’t tell people the good news. It would change the world.
April 5th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
bruced sez:
“I don’t think it’s about what we believe at all, but about what we know.”
But what we believe and what we know are synonyms, aren’t they? Again, I say, “????????????”
April 5th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
This is a very interesting thread as it shows off the different perspectives and gifts that people bring to the table.
I believe that society has a most valid interpretation, particularly if you look at the actual word meanings in Hebrew here. It isn’t a promise of long life but long days. KJV: “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.” Is this not a future promise? If not then God certainly broke His promise to His own son, didn’t He? A theme this Easter week that I’ve had buzzing in my head is “love is often crucified by sin, but always rises again”.
A key phrase is also upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. I imagine HIS’s friend’s father paid to live where he lived. For his obedience his days will be long on the land that God gives him (in Heaven or the New Earth?). I believe that is what the Scripture is saying.
So many of the promises God makes in the Bible are future, as in, after death, so we really need faith. I’ve never heard that our faith “fails us” but that God honors our faith. Nothing happens without Him.
There have been a few Scriptures that have challenged my faith just as the young woman’s faith was challenged by this apparent broken promise. When they have come along I’ve eventually made time to wrestle with God so to speak and get to the root meaning through study and prayer and meditation. If it bothers you that much you really need to focus on it. Otherwise you become comfortable with the self-pity and the blaming God part. [We should mourn along with the young lady but also help her to find understanding. I'd like to know what happened to her.]
One principle I’ve learned from this dialogue: If God sounds like a used car salesman, then we’re not finished understanding the Scripture! Thanks for that one, sailing.
April 5th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
“I still think the promise was made as a lesson to the youngsters who dishonor their parents. They faced execution for breaking this commandment.” (HIS)
That makes sense also - but then what’s the intent of something like that next law in relation to the first law? I think lookling into that we have to arrive at something more meaningful than a ‘mere forceful doing’ for the sake of the ‘doing’.
“If not, is there anything else in Ephesians we can just brush off as ‘maybe that is not what it means’.” (HIS)
I think the point of the Ephesians 6 passage is ‘honor your parents’ not the ‘promise’ aspect - that’s where the selectiveness is happening. It seems like a ‘tapped on comment’ after thus the brackets in the NASB version…again it matters very little ‘live long’ (NT) replaces ‘prolonged life’ (Tanakh) and this is again a scripture we guess at what ‘living long’ can mean (ex: rememberance or 70 year life, etc)…or what ‘prolonged’ means?
“So while you say “I would say absolutely nothing is required of you in this faith, no way and no how and never will be”, how do I tie that in with “You must believe to be born again”?” (HIS)
You make a choice to believe (follow me). You can also make a choice not to believe (do not follow him). Again this is dependant on one’s view of who God is (so they choose their path). So nothing is required of you from this faith (or God) and in this I am accurate - we have to choose to accept the teachings of God (no more and no less) and in that we begin an interaction with God. You can drop any commandment you personally choose to in my opinion (or even the use of the word commandment) but that is a ‘choice’. My point is this faith is accepted not forced.
I am not making the same point as Bruced - just in case anyone noticed (but I like his views).
“But ‘commanded’ in this sense really does not mean ‘commanded’, it means .. what.. doing it because we love God anyway? Then if we love God anyway why does he even have to mention that we have to love him?” (HIS)
Because the biblical writer(s) were making a ‘point’ (context and culture). You might not believe this but oddly enough some people in the gospels ‘did not love God’, they obeyed the law, but they failed to notice there was a difference. You can find this strongly in Matthew’s gospel when the Pharisee, Lawyers, Scribes, and Saducee’s, Herodians (and others) were constantly condemning Jesus for doing good - on the sabbath! Then they railed other accusations but Jesus noticed they follow the letter of the law - and forget the weighter things within it - like mercy (ie: forgiveness) and justice. Some people were being condemned by the law - not liberated by it - and what did they fail to ‘weigh’? Love is greater than sin. So the commandments are written in a time long ago where we didn’t live - but I think we can get the gist of it with Evangelicalism’s brand of Pharisee-ism and how we feel from some of that.
I just think getting to the heart of a subject is way deeper than we have looked into prior - when we were taught under less scrutinizing teachers - who took things simply at ‘face value’ (literalism). These same nimble minded men also thought truth was a ’static’ term - that we should just accept (as is) and not have life experience’s involved in the finding of ‘truth’ (or truth as a process) and that perhaps we don’t all get to the heart of a matter with reasoning alone (sometimes we have to get involved and ‘truth’ slowly unravels itself).
I take the example of slavery (on a bigger level). This was an accepted practice for many years, decades, and centuries. All of sudden humans saw this was a ’sham’ and it made certain people ‘less than’ others. How long did that process actually take the human race? If one has to guess - Moses records it way back when - and it stopped in the America’s in the 1900’s (with de-segregation - and in some places still happens). But we have come to the ‘truth’ of this matter - slavery is wrong no matter which country wears the shackles. Now that took some sweet time - but it is becoming the norm world-wide (not completely done away with as of yet). Truth takes time - but it’s us not understanding God’s intentions or heart.
Truth unravels where someone seeks it out. Then we just pick up where they left off and ‘run the race’ they passed onto us…elaborating as we see the need to do so. Truth is not a static event by no means. Thus we look at was passed onto us and see ‘holes’ after ‘holes’ in what was being done - in our cases - with the teachings of God. We make changes as need to be done - and this is on each of us seekers as God’s children to do…since when has the church changed to something more open like this though? Bet the world would be an awesome place if we did what we do on your blog - then build ideas from it.
April 5th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Dare I jump into the fray here?
HeIsSailing, to go back to your original post, I believe Societyvs made a crucial point:
“I am not so sure the bible is communicating this message to us - I think we might be reading some of that into the book.”
I don’t want to belittle this woman’s pain. She was hurt and confused and let down. I have been there, too, and there are lots of Christians who are all-too ready to point out to someone in agony what they have done wrong, thus negating God’s obligation in the matter. This keeps them from having to face their deepest fears - that the God they have put their “faith” in isn’t as faithful as he’d like them to be.
I know that religious people like to talk about God’s “promises”. It makes us feel safe and special, and a little like, well, we have something to hold over the God of the universe, which is pretty cool. It’s also a bit of a deceitful tactic to “trick” people (often even ourselves!) into better quality “faith” - something that is done FAR too often when it’s too scary to say ask the real questions, or to admit that there ARE questions. Truth is, we are too scared and too lazy to dig any deeper than last week’s church bulletin, so we settle for being “right” as we have defined it, and ignore the circularity of our own arguments - until we are faced with the kind of cognitive dissonance that this woman faced at the loss of her father.
I do believe that God makes promises in the Bible. But we’ve been led to believe that God is “upstairs” arranging everything that happens down here, and so long as we please him by believing REALLY hard, he is going to send down all kinds of great blessings.
So why doesn’t it work that way?
We’ve been lying to ourselves in the little things, and lies always come back to bite us. A lie that helps people do the right thing will eventually destroy even what it tries to support.
There is a difference between a promise and a principle. A promise means that God is going to overrule all else and make something happen. A principle is a statement of the way things are. Science tells us the way things are in the natural world. Sometimes, natural laws are overridden by other natural laws. Sometimes, principles are superceded by other principles, or by promises.
Yes, I know the verse says the commandment is “with promise”, and we’ve been taught that what that means is that God is really, really gonna do it if we obey him, but what it says linguistically is that this is the first commandment that gives you a reason why you should do it. God is saying, not only must you follow this commandment because it is right, but it only makes sense because there’s something in it for you. Yes, if you lived in Old Testament times, you wouldn’t get stoned as you would have if you continually failed to keep the commandment. But this appears again in the New Testament, long after the Levitical laws had passed away. I think that even we in the 21st century can see a recognizable principle here: Honor your parents so that you can live a long life. The two still go hand in hand. Not only do our parents protect us as children, but those who learn obedience and respect as children generally grow up to be disciplined, temperate, respectful adults. My parents forbade me to smoke cigarettes, abuse drugs or alcohol, and taught me a healthy respect for traffic laws. I could still die young, but believe that my respect for them has prolonged my life. My friend grew up with an alcoholic mother who stole things from the company where she worked. In my book, she didn’t deserve much honor, but my friend obeyed, and now respects and honors her mother’s memory. Her attitude toward authority has improved her life; she has much less stress than many other people I’ve seen; her children, who have learned from her how they should treat their mother, will likely take good care of her when she becomes older. All ’round, I’d say this is true, as a principle.
Just as the principle of gravity is not negated by an airplane or a hot-air balloon, the principles God gives us are not negated by the occasions when they are superceded. I don’t know why the woman’s father died. But we have to be committed to looking at what the Bible says instead of what the pastor said it was supposed to say. This is difficult, I admit. I struggle with it all the time. I read something with a certain slant because it’s pleasant to think of it that way, and that’s okay unless the text contradicts the slant or the slant becomes more salient in my mind than the text. Then it is dangerous and deceitful.
Looking back, there are a number of principles in my own life that were superceded by the Bible’s statement “all things work together for good to them that love God.” At the time, I didn’t know what was at work - I only knew that things weren’t happening the way I had expected. Other Christians at the time made the same kinds of speculations that Job’s friends made - criticizing me because it couldn’t be God that failed to do what we all saw was “best”, now could it?
Oh, how small-minded and short-sighted we were! Now I can see that what I saw as God’s failure and abandonment at the time were the wrappings of the best gifts I have received in my life. I didn’t believe that then - how could I? However, I am a lot slower to complain to God about breaking his “promises” to me now, because I’ve seen those things from the other side!
April 5th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
JennyPo sez:
“I think that even we in the 21st century can see a recognizable principle here: Honor your parents so that you can live a long life. The two still go hand in hand. Not only do our parents protect us as children, but those who learn obedience and respect as children generally grow up to be disciplined, temperate, respectful adults. My parents forbade me to smoke cigarettes, abuse drugs or alcohol, and taught me a healthy respect for traffic laws. I could still die young, but believe that my respect for them has prolonged my life.”
No offense to SocietyVs, bruced, Heather, JimJordan and the rest. I highly respect all your views and opinions. But this is the most reasonable thing I have read all day. I love learning new things and perspectives that make sense. Thanks JennyPo
April 6th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
“No offense to SocietyVs, bruced, Heather, JimJordan and the rest. I highly respect all your views and opinions. But this is the most reasonable thing I have read all day.” (HIS)
No Offense here - I admit JennyPo raised the best idea behind the ‘honor your parents’ and I think she gives some great reason for the ‘intent’ in the commandment (which I think she did beautifully). LIke I said, the truth unravels over time - and to think I am the answer on these issues would be unfounded ‘pride’ on my part - I think the communal struggle to find this answer really brought a lot of light out of that passage - and we were all involved in that process - and JennyPo (after considering it all) came with the best interpretation - and for that I am thankful (not offended).
I think if the church functioned in some of this open-ness - none of us would have left and we would develop some great ideas for working with our communities (from these texts). I see great value in these discussions - and I am always learning and tweaking my theological perspective - day by day - voice by voice - value by value (and this involved everyone in that ’seeking’). I only have props to give to everyone that comments - they are sharpening my mind, heart, soul, and strength - helping me define my vision and values - I think I would be nothing without communities like this to ‘push n prod’ my ideas/perspective. I thank you all!
April 6th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
**No offense to SocietyVs, bruced, Heather, JimJordan and the rest.” ** None taken at all. I also like Jenny’s approach to the text. I admire that even though we’re approaching this from different perspectives, we’re all carefully listening to one another and haven’t bashed anyone else’s view.
April 6th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Very exciting interchange! I see this as the Kingdom of God at work: hurting, lonely people bringing their needs to one another, and the whispering voice of the Spirit letting the “dead letter” speak, really nice. A community emerging despite the limitations of blogging.
April 7th, 2007 at 10:46 am
HIS should do a follow-up called “resurrection of a small group”. Oddly, this discussion from a long-dead group has brought the young woman’s deep hurt back to the fore. The Holy Spirit speaks through the Scriptures and when we give our honest perspectives on the Scriptures we can then be used to stimulate the healing process in the woman’s heart. Small groups are a great tool for the Spirit to do its work.
And in fact it is the Spirit that chooses which interpretation is going to begin to free the grieving daughter from her pain. It’s imperative that the members of the group know that they are sharing in a great blessing.
Happy Easter!