Month: December 2022

Week 50  2 Peter 2

All the books of the NT have some pretty weighty content. For instance Peter: when people escape from the wicked ways of the world by learning about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and then get tangled up with sin and become its slave again, they are worse off than before.
According to Peter if a guy breaks free from his old life but then goes back he’s not as-bad-off…he’s worse off: it would be better if he had never known the right way to live than to know it and reject it.
Let’s say that the numbers 1-25 are listed left-to-right across a page. The guy starts at #1 and follows the Lord – moving left-to-right and up the numbers…1-2-3-4-5-6. He gets to #6. For some reason he quits following the Lord. Back he goes: 6-5-4-3-2-1. Right back to where he started…right? Wrong says Peter.
It’s like the guy gets to #6. He decides to quit following the Lord so…back to #1. But he doesn’t stop at Square One. He keeps moving right-to-left past #1 to zero…maybe even farther into the negative numbers.
What’s his terminal point? No idea…but Peter says that #1 isn’t where he stops. It’s like any temporary progress he made contributes to making the regress even worse.
This is really seriously hard to figure…that a guy would potentially be better off and farther ahead by not following the Lord to begin with. It’s a hard pill-to-swallow and especially hard if it’s factually accurate.

Note: quote from 2 Peter 2:20 21 (NLT)

Week 50  1 Peter 1

Peter begins his letter talking about the topic of salvation but then for some reason takes a little sidetrack. It is salvation-related…but it’s more about prophets: salvation was something the prophets wanted to know more about. They prophesied about…salvation…even though they had many questions as to what it all could mean. They wondered what the Spirit of Christ within them was talking about when he told them in advance about Christ’s suffering and his great glory afterward.
Peter is kind of vague about how the mechanism of communication-transfer worked. He does say that the Spirit ‘within them’ was talking to them. Which is interesting but not too explicit.
More interesting to me is that the prophets themselves wanted to know more. Peter admits they had many questions as to what it all could mean. So even when a prophet got a miraculous forecast about the Lord he was – to some degree – still in the dark.
So for instance Isaiah said: to us a child is born…and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. This was good information no doubt. But it looks like Isaiah still had questions. Who will this be? When does he arrive? What’ll he do? What’ll things be like?
The prophets got correct – but not comprehensive – information.
They transmitted what they got but they – like their audience – still had plenty of questions.

Note: quotes from 1 Peter 1:10-11 (NLT) & Isaiah 9:6 (NIV)

Week 50  James 4

I made a mistake when I read James 4:5: do you think that the scripture speaks to no purpose:… The mistake was that I stopped right there at the colon (which James didn’t do since he still had half of the verse to write).
The problem with making a mistake is – obviously – that I’m wrong. But in this case I can live with it because my mistake left me asking a pretty good question: do I think that the scripture has no purpose?
It’s a pretty good & timely question to be asking myself during Week 50 because in a couple of weeks I’ll be deciding whether to start back in Genesis 1. Let’s face it…if the bible doesn’t have a goal or purpose then why should I bother?
So does the bible speak to no purpose? There’s two basic answers to the question:
Answer #1: Yes. The bible doesn’t really have any purpose.
Answer #2: No. The bible does have a purpose in mind.
I think it’s a pretty good self-administered bible-reader’s question to ask: if there’s no purpose or value or merit in the bible then why read it? On the other hand if there is something to be discovered then why not? There’s nothing much to lose…and maybe something to gain.

Note: This question is completely different than asking: is the bible difficult to understand? (if I asked 1,000,000 people that question only a couple of outliers would say: no the bible is simple.)

Week 49  James 3

James wrote: not many of you should become teachers in the church, for we who teach will be judged by God with greater strictness.
So if I’m a teacher I’ll be judged at a higher standard…
But if I’m a not teacher I’ll be judged at a lower standard.
This is a pretty interesting verse. Following the Lord is a little bit like being in a job where I’ll be evaluated for my work performance. Maybe not annually. But eventually.
I wondered whether I could map out a more comprehensive Assessment Hierarchy for the church. James says teachers will be assessed more strictly. What about other church positions? I started thinking back… In week 47 Paul listed a few positions: apostles prophets evangelists pastors teachers. He also mentioned bishops and deacons in the church. They’d likely be included. But I’m not sure what to make of people with “spiritual gifts” like healing & miracles & speaking in tongues. Are they ranked too?
I don’t get far before I start thinking that developing a church Assessment Hierarchy tool is likely a waste of time. For one thing the NT isn’t giving me enough info. And for another what difference does it make if an apostle is judged to a 98% degree-of-strictness and a teacher is assessed 12% less strictly?
The point is likely: keep it in mind that my assessment is coming…and act accordingly.

Note: quote from James 3:1 (NLT). See Ephesians 4:11.

Week 49  Hebrews

I’ve never seriously thought about reorganizing the books of the bible according to Degree of Seriousness where I’d put the most serious books at the top…then all the way down to least serious. I guess they’re all pretty serious in their own way. For me Job would likely be #1. Hebrews wouldn’t be far behind.
I think the reason Hebrews is so serious is because it has a lot of serious warnings. The writer seems to be relentlessly concerned about the guy who starts out walking with the Lord but then turns his back on him. He says: if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God’s judgment. That’s not the only ominous verse. I counted about a dozen others just like it. Dark grave severe sober warnings. With dire consequences.
I think that’s one of the reasons the writer gives quite a few prompts & goads: keep being faithful to the end. Keep pressing on to maturity. Keep on loving others as long as life lasts. Follow the example of people who have faith. Don’t waver…hold onto the faith you have. Remember that we’re not people who turn our backs on God.
The writer senses the tendency to slack-off. To give-up. To turn back. And he’s deadly serious about where that leads.

Note: quote from Hebrews 10:26-27 (NLT). Paraphrases from 3:14 6:1 6:11 6:12 10:23 10:39.

Week 48  Philemon

I don’t know how many of them there are in total. But I know a lot of things in the bible are incomprehensible to modern readers. The main reason? They’re old & behind-the-times & archaic &  well…incomprehensible.
By contrast in the modern-world I understand modern things because I’m modern. I won’t understand a lot of ancient-world things because I’m not ancient.
Anyway there’s an ancient thing in Philemon that’s surprisingly and totally understandable to modern people. Paul says to Philemon: if (Onesimus) has harmed you in any way or stolen anything from you, charge me for it…I will repay it. Then he adds one extra thing: and I won’t mention that you (Philemon) owe me your very soul.
So it looks like in the ancient world – just like in the 21st century – there was a Who Owes The Most Rule in play. Let’s say Guy #1 owes Guy #2 $100,000. Then let’s say Guy #2 borrows $10 from Guy #1. Guy #1 can’t really go demanding that Guy #2 pay back the couple of bucks he owes him. Guy #1 owes the most and that means Guy #2 is in the driver’s seat. That rule is totally understandable to me.
In one way this universal Debtor-Ratio Law is so obvious I wonder why Paul figured he needed to remind Philemon who was in the driver’s seat. It seemed unnecessary. Like piling-on. But who knows…maybe Philemon was a bit thick and needed the blunt reminder.

Note: quotes from Philemon 18-19 (NLT)

Week 48  Titus 1

368 days ago I was reading Paul’s Qualification List for church leaders. I remember wondering: how-in-the-world did anyone qualify?
Since I’m pretty sure that some people did qualify I’m thinking that either a) believers in the 1st century were far far superior to modern-day Alberta church leaders or b) I’m misunderstanding the list.
By ‘misunderstand’ I don’t mean that I can’t understand (there’s about 20 items in the list and most of them are understandable to an elementary school-aged kid). By ‘misunderstand’ I mean that I wonder if I’m understanding the list in a way Paul didn’t intend.
Here’s the thing: I tend to think of the list as (what I’d call) absolute. Take the first qualification as an example: a leader must live a blameless life. To me that means: a leader must live an absolutely blameless life. And if I’m right about that then you only qualify if you’re 100% blameless. So mine is like a light-switch test: you’re either on or off. No in-between.
But here’s the other thing: if it’s a light-switch test then there’ll be very very few candidates (maybe not even one). So because of that I’m tending to come down more on the side of a Qualification List that’s relative. Meaning that leadership candidates had to be showing some evidence of progress in each of the qualifications.
Paul was maybe asking for the stars…knowing he might only get the moon.

Note: quote from Titus 1:7 (NLT)

 

Week 48  1 Timothy 5

In the middle section of chapter three I’m reduced to doing some guess-work. What seems pretty clear is that there was some kind of regular practice in Timothy’s church that related to widows. In the first-century Mediterranean world when widows were widowed they instantly became lonelier and more vulnerable. One of the nice things about the church was that – ideally – it was looking out for it’s weakest loneliest most vulnerable & disadvantaged members. That part I understand.
But one thing – and the main point for me – is that Paul refers a couple of times to what he calls The List. And I think the main question he’s talking about in the paragraph is: which widows qualify for The List?
Paul spells-out some qualifiers:
If a widow had other relatives they should support her (so…she’s not on The List)
If a widow was young & immature she should consider remarriage (so…she’s not on The List)
But if a widow was a) old and b) had an excellent record of service & hospitality & good deeds she could qualify for The List.
Practical criteria like these make sense to me…but I’m left asking a different question: what-all did getting on The List mean? I guess the simplest answer is: widows got some social assistance. But would a mature & capable widow also take on an enhanced position in the congregation? Have more responsibilities? Something like that?
I don’t know. I’m only guessing.

Note: the passage is 1 Timothy 5:3-16. November end-of-month reading report: 96% completed.