Greetings!
Peace, mercy, and grace be with you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Upper respiratory infections are no fun. Thankfully it is clearing out. May God bless and keep you as the summer begins!
Sunday, June 09, 2024
The Voice 14.23: The Throne and the Lamb in Heaven | Revelation 4:1-5:14
The Revelation proper began with John seeing a vision of the heavenly realms, a vision not terribly unlike what Isaiah and Ezekiel saw. But what Isaiah and Ezekiel could not see was the Lamb slain for the sins of many and who overcame. His praises are sung around the heavenly throne no matter what might transpire on earth, and we should draw comfort and encouragement from that.
The Gospel of John Study at West Los Angeles College Christian Club: Jesus at Hanukkah | John 10:22-42
It has been an experience to go through the text of John’s Gospel and lay it out as he laid the story out, at least in this first half of the Gospel. Thematically it would make sense to treat John 10:1-42 as one unit, since the theme of Jesus as Shepherd predominated; and yet John introduced a pretty major spatial/temporal shift between John 10:21 and John 10:22, the first one noted since John 7:1. Jesus ostensibly left and then came back to Jerusalem after a couple of months and then returned to the same theme He pursued when He left.
Closely associating Himself with His Father as One in John 10:30 is profound and evokes the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4. But it’s His argument from Psalm 82 which proves vexing: how He interpreted and applied the text can be discerned, and we can explore what Asaph was attempting to accomplish with the psalm, but finding a way to bring them both together proves quite challenging.
And apparently it needs to be said: the Feast of Dedication is indeed Hanukkah, and yes, Jesus did go up to Jerusalem to observe that occasion. Jewish people of the Second Temple Period absolutely did not believe God stopped working for His people after the days of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi. It would be almost impossible to well understand the success of the Maccabean revolt and the establishment of the Hasmonean state without reference to the covenant loyalty and providence of God.
The book of 1 Maccabees tells the narrative, and it is apocryphal. The Maccabean author in fact testifies to how he is not inspired:
They deliberated what to do about the altar of burnt offering, which had been profaned. And they thought it best to tear it down, so that it would not be a lasting shame to them that the nations had defiled it. So they tore down the altar and stored the stones in a convenient place on the temple hill until a prophet should come to tell what to do with them (1 Maccabees 4:44-46).
By expecting a future prophet, the author confessed there was no prophet in the days of the Maccabees, and by extension regarding himself and his own day. Thus 1 Maccabees is likely pretty reliable as a historical witness even if we do not consider it as originating from an inspired historical prophet.
But what is notable is how Jesus of Nazareth would be that kind of prophet. And, ultimately, in His own way, did He not tell them what would happen? All of the stones of the Temple would be torn down and profaned by the pagan overlords of Rome, and the whole Temple would suffer the same fate as the stones of that altar (cf. Matthew 24:1-2).
Thus there should be resonance between what Jesus confesses about Himself and when and where He does so. God has not abandoned His people. Something greater than the Temple was present, but Israel according to the flesh would not honor Him as such, and would instead work entirely contrary to His purposes. And the abomination of desolation would return to their Temple, and its profanation would become complete.
Lesson: Alcohol | Chemical Temptations
Outline | Podcast | Conversation
One of the things I have learned by experience involves situations in which there is far more light than heat: the more bombastic the rhetoric, generally the less substance stands behind it.
And so it goes with how alcohol gets discussed. There’s all kind of rhetorical bombast, and much of it goes against the grain of what Scripture actually teaches. The influence of the prohibition/temperance movement remains potent even if not really acknowledged.
Let none be deceived: it is entirely right and even honorable for people to decide to abstain from consuming alcohol. None should tempt those who abstain. Likewise, excess of consumption of alcohol, as drunkenness, is always and everywhere condemned in Scripture. Drinking parties and similar contexts involving excess of consumption are likewise condemned. No attempt is being made to excuse or justify such behaviors.
But the consumption of any and all alcohol is never condemned in Scripture; quite the contrary. The majority of the characters within the Bible’s pages drank wine and beer. God is praised as having given wine and beer to people to enjoy.
It is good to not cause anyone to stumble when it comes to the consumption of alcohol. None should be tempted to break abstinence. But there is also no ground or basis upon which to condemn or cast aspersions against those who elect to exercise the liberty to consume some alcohol in moderation.
Alcohol is a lot like sexuality: it can certainly be “enjoyed” and “consumed” both to excess and to the great harm of not only the user, but also those around them. Yet such does not negate proper consumption and enjoyment in the appropriate context. Abstinence is not only allowed but can even be seen as honorable; yet there have remained voices among Christians for generations who have gone beyond what is written and demanded abstinence by all.
The greatest test of whether we truly “speak where the Bible speaks” is whenever the text stands at variance with a significant cultural or subcultural value. We are conditioned to think of these in terms of the more “liberalizing” or “secular” values, but they just as equally can exist among people who follow Jesus and/or seek to maintain or impose more “conservative” values or principles. Loosing where God has not loosed is a temptation ever before us; yet binding where God has not bound also remains an equally strong temptation, and we must resist it as well.
One of the two areas of the British Museum which is not entirely overwhelming features portions of the wall of the Tomb of Nebamun, an Egyptian official in charge of the grain of Thebes around the time of Tutankhamun. The room is in sharp contrast to the rest of the museum - much less material so one can appreciate what is there. This is an idealized scene of Nebamun with his wife and daughter as he hunts birds along the afterlife version of the Nile, since the grain collector of Thebes would not be doing anything of the sort in life. The skill of Egyptian artists in its golden age is fully on display here: the life and vibrancy of all involved is the point.
Book Reviews
In theology, as well as science, some of the most important discoveries are made when fundamental assumptions are challenged and re-examined.
John M.G. Barclay has provided such a service in terms of understanding grace and the gift in Paul & the Gift (affiliate link).
The nature of grace and how God bestows grace has been one of the major points of contention within Christian theology for at least 1500 years. Barclay began by carefully defining his terms: he considered grace in terms of the anthropological category of gift. He deeply explored the ancient context to bring out elements of their understanding of giving and receiving gifts and the social obligations of gifts which may seem foreign and strange to modern Westerners but were common currency in Biblical times. He explored the ways in which grace and the gift, especially as manifest in Paul’s letters, was understood throughout the ages, and deeply explored what grace and the gift looked like in Second Temple Jewish literature. Having done all of this, Barclay then focused on interpretations of Galatians and Romans to better understand how Paul conceived of the gift, or grace of God in Christ, and how it influenced his theology.
It would be nearly impossible to do full justice to this investigation in only a few words, but Barclay’s conclusions about these matters are compelling and should provide the new standard of understanding regarding grace and the gift, especially in Pauline literature. Barclay well demonstrated how Greco-Roman and Jewish conceptions of gift giving were to the end of reciprocal relations and was not understood in terms of our conception of the ideal “gift” without any obligations. It seems strange to us to consider a gift given but the receiver has obligations to honor the giver; it would not be strange in the ancient world to understand how a gift was “unconditioned without being unconditional”. This understanding goes a long way to clarifying the major conundrum which Protestantism has never well resolved since its assumptive priors about grace and obedience are late medieval: neither Jesus nor Paul nor anyone else in early Christianity had any difficulty with the idea of God’s gift in Christ being completely freely given and “incongruous” in every way, completely undeserved and beyond anything we could ever imagine, and yet in receiving it we are under obligation, “under grace,” to be obedient in faith, living by the Spirit as well attested in Romans 6:1-8:39.
The other major element regarding grace and the gift which Barclay highlighted was that premise of incongruity: in the ancient world gifts were normally proportional to the “standing” and “worth” of the recipient. Yet what has astonished and overwhelmed Paul was the great incongruity of the gift, or grace, which God has bestowed upon us in Christ: we are completely unworthy, and it remains possible to accuse God of cheapening justice because of the mercy He demonstrates in Jesus. Such “incongruity” has often been assumed in modern theological discourse about the gift/grace, but Barclay did well to point out how dangerous this kind of grace would have seemed back in the day. He would like to unsettle our easy reduction of grace as “unmerited favor,” not because we somehow do deserve or merit it, but to understand how more often than not, in both ancient and modern worlds, the display of grace/the gift is more attuned to honor, merit, and standing. The Gospel, especially as understood by Paul, is extravagant by comparison.
And this is what Barclay wishes to stress from Galatians and Romans: he argued Paul did not attempt to make sense of the gift of God in Christ in terms of the greater story, but instead Paul was completely transformed by the gift God had given in Christ, and that transformation led to a complete re-conceptualization of the story from beginning to end. The incredibly incongruous gift was the Christ event, Jesus living, dying, and rising again, and it changed everything, and forced a theological re-evaluation of anything and everything which Second Temple Jewish people would have believed and understood, and Paul was working that out in his writings. And that transformation would be lived out in Christian community, with men and women of different backgrounds and classes reconciled to God and one another by means of this incongruous and shocking gift of what God had accomplished in Jesus.
This book deserves the accolades it has received and would be good for anyone with a decent handle on the historical and theological basics of grace/the gift, Second Temple Judaism, and Christianity to consider.
The story of America has been one of dynamic change and movement. Almost everyone who is here has ancestors who moved here within the past few generations. And plenty of people have moved some distance from where they were born. This kind of rootlessness seems a core part of the American story: if you need a change of fortunes, pack up and move somewhere else.
Yet in so doing one loses many things. Daniel Grothe would rather make the opposite case for people: there can be great value and power in staying and being rooted in a place, as he demonstrated in The Power of Place: Choosing Stability in a Rootless Age (affiliate link; galley received as part of early review program).
After a not-exactly-necessary humblebrag about how he was interviewed to become a major leader at a very large church, the author introduced the conundrum thus involved: the opportunity seemed great, but he and his family had established significant roots where they were and were enjoying a form of communal living on a ranch. He set forth the American story, but also its challenges, and what gets lost when one picks up and moves.
Throughout the author tries hard to maintain a recognition that some will be compelled to move: military families, for instance. Plenty of people are compelled by significant economic reasons to move elsewhere: it is one thing when there’s the nice hope of a promotion or something of the sort, but if all the jobs have left a given area, people do generally have to go. Ironically the one group that often moves which is not addressed very much is the one of which the author is a part: church leadership. Rarely does the preacher/pastor get to enjoy the benefits and luxury of staying in place which the other members of the congregation can enjoy.
The author made appeals to the wisdom of other authors and authorities: Wendell Berry, Jimmy Carter, the author’s grandmother Louise "Weezy" Wilson, and others, questioning the value of constantly moving or always seeking better pastures, and to appreciate the wisdom and value of appreciating a given place, getting to know it as one is known.
The author’s final section involves the practices one needs to enjoy stability in a given place: to have stability in the home, family, friendship, church, and community, and to live in these contexts in dignity and honor if one will enjoy the fruit which can attend to them.
The subject is important and the author is engaging; the book is written for a very broad, non-specialist audience, and especially for those who would profess Jesus.
There is great power in place; where I am in Los Angeles would seem to be the antithesis to this, but it is in what LA often lacks which one can discern the power of place. When everyone is uprooted, people start looking for community and connection, but it often proves transactional and volatile. Those outside want to think the big issue here is immorality; it’s certainly there, but no more or less than anywhere else. The real challenge in Los Angeles is loneliness and isolation, and all the more so because odds are you have come from somewhere else, and statistically you’re quite likely to move on as well.
Yes, we do well to honor the importance of place and encourage people to develop and cultivate roots in a given place: a geographic community, in a church, in their families, etc. But we also need to recognize such is a gift which not everyone is able to enjoy, and, unfortunately, it is not a very appealing gift for the many for whom family, church, community, etc. were traumatic and places of pain. In the end, it is not good to be alone, and it is not good to always be on the move. We need to well root ourselves in the Lord Jesus Christ and His people and find ways to honor the place(s) in which we find ourselves.
Your support is not taken for granted; thank you! Please share and subscribe if you haven’t.
May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirits.
Ethan