Opus 2026-135: Monday Pulpit: Needs and Wants

The pastor was out of town and we had one of the back ups in the pulpit.  He was preaching on John 4 and the encounter of Jesus with the Samaritan woman at the well.  He lifted out a couple of verses that I know I have read many times but I don’t remember noticing,

John 4:3-4 (KJV) 3 He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee. 4 And he must needs go through Samaria.

Jesus is going from Judea in the south to Galilee in the north.  In between was Samaria.  Jews and Samaritans did not get along.  Jews would usually go the long way around if they had to take this trip.  It was doable and a regular path.  For some reason Jesus had a “need” to go directly.

No, He didn’t.  There was a recognized path to avoid polluting yourself by passing through Samaria.  “Needs” here does not mean that there was no option.  It means that He had a compelling reason that He did not share.  All I can conclude is that He needed to run into the woman at the well and share the good news with her and her village.

We need to keep that in mind as we go through our day and run into situations that we would rather avoid.  There are times when God has plans that we are not privy to.  It is hard to know when we should press for change and when we should accept but we need to have a basic understanding that God often has multiple goals and we might not know any of them.

Be faithful.  Walk upright.  Live a righteous life and trust that He has more irons in the fire than He cares to share with us.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-250: Parable or History

Are you ready for a question?  Maybe you have thought about it.  Maybe you wonder what I am talking about.  Maybe you wonder if I have been in the rhubarb again.  The question is, “Is the book of Job history or a parable?”  Is it a literal event that took place in a land called Uz or is it a story written to explore the problem of evil?  

If you are a five point Calvinist then you have to believe it is a parable.  Consider the first verse,

(Job 1:1 NAS77) There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job, and that man was blameless, upright, fearing God, and turning away from evil.

I say that because such a person could not exist in their theology.

I meddle.

Back to the question at hand.  I go back and forth on this.  I don’t think the book itself gives us the answer.  I don’t think the answer changes the message of validity of the message.  The arguments are true either way.

As I began to read Job it struck me that this must be some kind of parable.  If you have a Bible handy read through the opening scene of the book.  Look down to verses 6-7.

(Job 1:6-7 NAS77) Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.  And the LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come?" Then Satan answered the LORD and said, "From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it."

It doesn’t go into much detail but I get the idea of the classical stereotype of God as an old man with a long beard sitting on a throne with others gathered around.  It is a nice picture but it doesn’t fit the actual statements about God such as,

(Joh 4:24 NAS77) "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."

and

(1Jn 1:5 NAS77) And this is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.

Then you have the understanding that God is not just your everyday deity.  He is a bit more awesome than that.  Solomon understood this thousands of years ago.

(2Ch 6:18 NAS77) "But will God indeed dwell with mankind on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain Thee; how much less this house which I have built.

Think about what it would have been like in the presence of God as it is described in Job.  I think the story is given in order for us to understand the events that are going to happen.  I don’t think our minds could wrap themselves around the visual of Almighty God in conference with the Angle of Light.

I could be wrong.  As they say, you are entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong it is.

homo unius libri

Opus 2015-428: Bread

Historically bread was a primary food, a staple.  When there was nothing else, there was bread of some kind.  Every culture had some kind of bread:  tortillas, pita, bagels, biscuits, saltines, won-ton, and the list goes on.  Only in modern times has our wealth and plenty made it an accompaniment to other foods, almost a condiment.  Only in modern health food culture does it become the enemy because of carbohydrates and gluten. We take it for granted.

I came across a statement that gives an idea of the place that bread played as late at the French Revolution.  In France, 1789, “Bread constituted three-fourths of an ordinary person’s diet and cost one-third to one-half of his or her income.”1

Forget the potatoes.  Don’t even dream about meat.  Hope you can get enough bread.

One Sunday the congregation was reciting the Lord’s Prayer together and we came to the line that says,

(Matthew 6:11 KJV)  Give us this day our daily bread.

That got me to thinking about communion and its reference to bread.

(1 Corinthians 11:23 KJV)  ...That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

We do not understand the historical importance that this is declaring.  Not only is Jesus to be a daily part of our lives but He is to be thought of as our primary sustenance.  This is the context of His reminder.

(John 6:48 KJV)  I am that bread of life.

If you are a Christian you are to take communion.  When you do, you are to remember the sacrifice Jesus made.  You are to remember that He died for your sins.  You are also to be reminded that He is to be at the core of your nutritional needs, not a condiment.

1Massie, Robert K.  Catherine the Great.  New York:  Random House, 2011, page 534.

homo unius libri

Opus 2013-365: Basic Beliefs: God Is..., Part 1 of 3

Years ago in a seminary class the professor stated that there are three categorical statements about God in the Bible.  These are in addition to the attributes stated or implied.  These are statements that begin, “God is....”  When I did a search for “God is” in my software I came up with 169 hits.  Most of them are simple statements like “God is giving to us.”  Those obviously don’t fit this category.  Others are more subtle like,

(Deuteronomy 4:31 KJV)  (For the LORD thy God is a merciful God;) he will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.

I want to look at the three statements given by that professor.  Interestingly they are all from the writings of John, the last writer and the one with the most time to reflect.  This is not intended as a required doctrinal statement explaining God.  It is simply a look at some of the basics.

The first statement,

(John 4:24 KJV)  God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

First, lets deal with the translation.  In the KJV and other older translations this describes God as “a” Spirit.  Modern translations drop the indefinite article and simply have “God is spirit.”  Greek does not use the articles the way we do.  The definite article, “the,” is used sparingly and seems to indicate emphasis.  The indefinite articles, “a” and “an,” do not exist in Greek so anywhere you see them they are added on the opinion of the translators.

The theological point here is that the eternal God is not a physical being.  When the Son came to earth he was “incarnated.”  That means He crossed a line and took on the physical nature of human beings without giving up the divine nature.  In essence though, it means that we are not to think of God in physical terms. 

There are numerous figures of speech in the Bible that are used to teach us about God.  They help us to understand bigger lessons.  There are times when the word picture is clear in our minds and seems to indicate that God is physical.

(Mark 16:19 KJV)  So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

But if God is not physical, He does not have hands.  It is just as powerful to accept this as a metaphor and learn from it.  Everything is the Bible is not to be taken literally.  How do you know?  Paraphrasing the realtor who asked what was most important, “Three things:  Context, context, context.”Try to understand the Bible in the context of the Bible. 

For example.

(Psalms 91:4 KJV)  He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.

Does that mean that God is a chicken?  If you insist that everything is totally literal that is your declaration.  If you accept that this is a metaphor, then don’t insist everything is literal.  Accepting the inspiration of the Word is not the same as demanding a literal interpretation.

More could be said but the first point is that God is Spirit, not material.

To be continued...

homo unius libri