Now is not the time to build something: Mark 9

Mark continues to write long and diverse chapters. Here, in Mark 9 (link), we go from the Mount of Transfiguration all the way through casting out a demon, on to having child-like faith and finishing on gouging out your eye to not go to hell. At the very least, there’s a dozen sermons in this chapter. I will not attempt to preach them all right here.

Not that I wouldn’t like to. Let’s take a look just one part:

The Mount of Transfiguration. This is, by my estimate, the number one moment of “weird” in the earthly ministry of Jesus. The healings are great, the teaching is awesome, and the nature-controlling moments just reinforce the divinity of Christ. The Resurrection is the biggest event in history and the Virgin Birth of Jesus is close alongside.

Yet then there’s this story. Peter, James, and John go up on an undisclosed mountain with Jesus. Suddenly, Jesus and his garments become radiant and “exceedingly white” (Mark 9:3, note that “no launderer on earth” could do that). Also, Elijah and Moses show up to talk with Jesus.

That we look back and see the symbolism of Jesus talking with Moses the Lawgiver and Elijah the Prophet as valuable does not truly diminish the oddity of this story. I have yet to find a single point in a Protestant Evangelical Theology that hangs solely on the Transfiguration. This despite the presence of the event in all three Synoptic Gospels.

It’s just an odd story. We don’t know much about what to do with it. The biggest point of theology here is the voice from heaven, what we would assume is the voice of God Himself. In this case, God is attesting again what was said at the Baptism of Jesus: “This is My beloved Son.” That’s not a bad reminder.

Where I find the help in this passage is in the action of Peter. In this chapter, Peter proves that he was not the first Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, but rather the founder of the First Baptist Church. When faced with an amazing, once-in-eternity spiritual event, Peter wants to…

Build something. Actually, three somethings. He’d like to build three tabernacles, one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah. Now, we Baptists are big fans of building stuff and this sounds just like us. There’s a moment here to be learned from, there is something amazing happens.

And Peter’s concern is to find a way to put a roof over it and hold it tight. His motives here are unknown, except Mark notes Peter’s fear. He could have wanted to note a great moment and be reminded of it for years to come. He may have thought that Jesus, Moses, and Elijah were going to be there a while and would need a place to sleep. He might have wanted to be rewarded for his building.

I think it’s safe to give Peter the benefit of the doubt and admit that I would not have known what to do either. I would have fallen into an action bias at that point as well. In case I’m making up terms, I’ll explain action bias: it is a tendency to say “let’s do something, even if it’s wrong.” It is a bias to act without thinking.

By the way, the opposite is ‘inaction bias’ which is the assumption that nothing should ever be done. That’s bad as well.

There is a time, though, to stop and learn. A time to realize that nothing that your hands can put forward will be memorial enough for the moment. A time to learn at the feet of the Master: for Peter, James, and John, they likely would have grown up with great respect for Moses and Elijah, but here is Jesus being highlighted as greater than even these two.

That’s a big deal. Don’t miss the big deal moments of life because you’re too busy trying to blog them or take pictures or make memorials. Sometimes, it is better to live the moment and let your mind do the remembering later.

Today’s Nerd Note: I’m trying to get my word count for these posts back down, it’s been creeping way up. So, the Nerd Note is more of a question:

Do you read both the Transfiguration story and the demon-casting story that follows immediately after it together? You should. This is what met Jesus coming down the mountain. Keep them together in your mind. While there are separable lessons in each, there are lessons paired here as well.

Some things cannot be bought: Exodus 30

Exodus 30 (link) carries us further into the discussion of how to build a mobile sanctuary for the worship of the Almighty God of the Universe. This was not something that had been needed before. In the age of the patriarchs, that time before Jacob and his sons went to Egypt, there were not very many people gathered in one place to worship God. So, a family-size altar was more than adequate.

Now, though, one needs a nation-size altar. That gets to be a whole different ballgame. There is certainly something instructive in that thought about how worship method may need to adjust when you go from family gatherings to gathering with more than one family. That's another discussion, though. It will come back to a somewhat more personalized answer. The answer should still be scripturally-bounded, but the variance between people, cultures, and family sizes are remarkable. I will not attempt to solve that here.

Instead, let's look at two other portions of this chapter. The first is something repeated twice, at the end of the descriptions of how the incense for the altar and the anointing oil were to be made. These are described in detail, all of the recipe is given.

Then this command is made: anyone who makes either the oil or the incense for their own use is to be cut off from their people. These items were to be used only in worship at the Tabernacle. It was not something to be done at home or as part of your own Torah study group. It was only to be used for what God specified it for—no matter what good intentions an individual may have had in the process.

The other portion that jumps off the page for me in this chapter is Exodus 30:15. This is the summary verse after the command that each person of Israel was to give a half-shekel every time a census was taken. Notwithstanding how good it sounds to only pay a tax every ten years in America, the command about payment here is more valuable for us.

God commanded that every person pays the half-shekel. The poor pay it; the rich pay it; everyone pays it and everyone pays the same. What does that tell us?

It tells us that they are paying for something that cannot be bought. If it could be bought, then the price would vary according to ability or need, but it does not. Instead, the half-shekel here is a token acknowledgement of the dependence of the people on God for their redemption and deliverance.

In short, it was something that could not be bought. In the same way, the holiness and the worship that the oil and the incense were for could not be bought and taken home personally. They could only be provided at the place of meeting with God.

This is a lesson we would do well to remember. There is no way that we can personally pay for or obtain holiness and righteousness before God. Neither can we make it for ourselves by mixing the right components of devotion or action.

Instead we must realize that only God's grace can provide those things for us. In turn, our response can be either to accept that grace and respond by offering our lives and our obedience or by rejecting it.

What will you do?

Today's Nerd Note: The Nerd Side is taking a break. Be back tomorrow.

May 27 Sermon Wrap-up

Morning Audio Link (alternate link)

Evening Audio Link (alternate link)

Morning Outline:

There's a link here to the text of a sermon preached in 1770 about righteous rulers and the responsibility of God's people to work to make sure that's the kind of rulers they have.

2 Samuel 23:1-7

Rev. Samuel Cooke May 30, 1770

Web note: http://www.belcherfoundation.org/civil_government.htm

2 Samuel 23:1-7

I. David's Last Words--

     A. Not exactly last, but one of his main closing statements (Psalm 72 is possibly another)

     B. He speaks here more as a prophet or preacher than as a king

II. What do we gather?

     A. As citizens of the United States of America

          1. We have the blessing, thanks to the sacrifices of many others before us, of choosing our own leaders

          2. That on its own is worth celebrating and remembering: we do not have to live with someone of ungodly character simply inheriting the power over our lives that the government holds

          3. In turn, we need to apply this somewhat backwards. While David is speaking of the character that the king should aspire to, we should consider this as a test of the character that one pass to receive our support

          4. Our focus must be on our covenant with God: we must demonstrate that we will trust Him to provide and protect if we do that which is righteous

     B. As a church

          1. Faithfulness secures our legacy

          2. More than our own faithfulness, but the faithfulness of God to honor His own word

     C. As individual people

          1. Strive first to place our hearts on the rock

          2. Pass this on to our house, our lineage

          3. Build a generation that will follow God no matter what

               a. In faith

               b. In practical matters

Evening Outline:

Acts 2

Birthday of the Church

I. Prayer

II. Fellowship

III. Unity

IV. Evangelism

V. Ridicule

VI. Scripture

VII. Victory

Halfway out of the darkness: Mark 8

When reading through the whole Bible, there are places where just a few short verses really pack a lot of meaning. When you get to Mark 8 (link) those verses are Mark 8:22-26, and they summarize the entire chapter.

In these verses, Jesus is brought a blind man. One of the quirks of this passage is that the "they" brought a blind man to Jesus. We get no clear answer in trying to answer who "they" is referring to. The closest nominative would be the disciples in the paragraphs before, but that seems unlikely. Instead, my guess it that we're talking about the townspeople of Bethsaida.

On track, what we see here is the only story I can remember in the Bible where there is a half-way healing. Jesus first spits on the man's eyes (possibly puts saliva rather than a rude spit) and lays hands on him. He then asks the man if he sees anything.

The man sees, but he sees men unclearly, as if they are trees walking about. Likely, this clues us in that he was not born blind, but had lost his sight. This would not surprising: there are several diseases that can result in lost sight if untreated. Whatever else is inherent here, this much is certain: the man has not been completely healed. He's not blind, but you would not hand him the reins of the chariot, either.

Now, zoom back out to the whole chapter. What is happening in this whole chapter? First, we have the feeding of the 4,000. Once again, people follow Jesus without food. Once again, the disciples question how they are all going to eat. Once again, Jesus feeds the whole lot. The disciples still don't get it, the Pharisees and Sadducees don't get it, and Jesus has to explain it all again.

These folks see, but they fail to see clearly.

After the blind man, we have Mark's explanation of Peter's recognition of Jesus as the Messiah. Well, that and Peter's attempt to tell Jesus that He does not need to be crucified. These two need to go together: some Bible translations put a heading between Peter's confession and Jesus predicting the Cross and the Resurrection. These two go hand-in-hand: Peter makes a smart statement and a not-so-smart statement in them, and they are as much about showing the disciples' issues as they about Jesus.

Again, we see this: the disciples see. They see that Jesus is the Messiah but do not see that He has come to suffer for their sins and rise again. It seems that blurry vision runs through more than just the blind man. It runs through this whole chapter.

So, let us return to the blind man. He spends more time with Jesus. Really, just a few more moments. Yet those moments are all it takes. Those moments and one more touch, and the man can see everything clearly. The ISV uses the modifier of "even at a distance" showing that the man had truly gotten a very good healing of the eyes in this case.

What shall we do with this?

I would point you to our own times. There are many people who see, but see dimly, the words of Christ and the Word of God. They can quote portions of Scripture, but they have difficulty seeing the whole of what is happening.

In all honesty, most of us live somewhere in that, though some see more clearly than others. What we all need is to spend that extra few moments with Jesus and let Him touch us through His Word and the Spirit of God to get that much more clarity about what is really happening around us.

This is the only real solution to what is going on around us today. Whether it is within the church or with how the church relates to whatever culture we sit in the middle of, we need to draw near to Christ. Let Him help us to see rather than continue to be led about, running into trees and away from men.

Let's get more than half-way out of the darkness. Let us stay with Him until we see it all clearly, even the distance of eternity.

Today's Nerd Note: The miracle of healing the blind man here is one of only two that Mark records but no one else does. The other is the healing of the deaf man in Mark 7:31-35. Both of these miracles used the touch of Jesus and not just His word. This goes to the depiction in Mark of Jesus as a man of action.

Additionally in Mark 8 we see that the miracles of feeding the 5,000 and feeding the 4,000 are two separate events. Jesus refers back to both as He tries to get through to His disciples. This gives us one other key point: if Mark gives us an accurate record of the words of Jesus, then Jesus believed that 5,000 were fed from five loaves and 4,000 from seven loaves.

For those who would "demystify" the text and remove the miracles, holding only to the teachings, you are kind of stuck here. The Teacher Himself claims these two miracles to be true and uses them to illustrate His point. That means we either accept His teaching about Himself, that He could do such things, or we doubt His teaching. Alternately, you could claim Mark is inaccurate, but when you do that you need to answer this one: How do you know anything about Jesus if the Gospels are not accurate? The "this does not sound like Jesus" will not work: how do you know what He sounds like? Only through His Word. We either know Him from His word, or we don't know Him. He really did not leave us any other way.

Political Thoughts for May 25

So, I should be doing an entry in the completely through the Bible series, but I'm not. Instead, I'd like to make a few random observations about life, especially politics, for now.

#1: Except for those of you in runoff elections, get your signs and put them away. You can put them back up in October. September if you're going to be nice.

#2: All of this discussion of allowing "gay marriage" and I haven't told you directly what I think. I think that Biblical morality would call living that lifestyle sin. In the same way that about a zillion other things that we already allow in America are also a sin. What should we do about it?

My opinion is this: we should get the government completely out of the marriage business. Completely. Marriage has been around for a long, long time—there do not seem to be historical records of a time when there was not a family/social institution called "marriage." It has been defined by religion, by culture, and by government. We are reaching a point where the government definition and the religious definition of practically every major religion are at odds with one another.

So, here is the solution I would propose: do away with laws governing marriage. Create a legal category using the term "domestic partnership" or whatever you like, and make it a legally-binding, legally-defined contract between two people on whatever grounds and basis the state determines it should be done on. Leave the definition of "marriage" to individual religions or not-religions. Take me as a minister out of the business of signing off on a legal agreement and leave me only addressing the spiritual/religious nature.

Leave in place laws regarding having to be an adult to enter in to either agreement. We don't need any nonsense of spiritually marrying minors and then forcing them into that life as adults. But require that any of the legal benefits, including joint tax filing, come from the civil contract and not the religious one. Grandfather in all of us old married people but make that change. As such, every one has equal rights under the law and every religion remains free to hold its own teachings.

#3: For my fellow Christians who think that this will make it impossible to teach our children to follow a Bible-centered course of morality: Really? Seeing same-sex couples will make it harder than our kids seeing celebrities that are only married for 72 days? Or the serial divorces and remarriages that we have been allowing in our churches for decades? We are either going to teach our children that following God will make them be/look/act different than the society around them or we won't.

And that can be done without teaching them to disdain the people around them. Of all the things the Romans persecuted Christians for, nowhere have I seen anything that says the Romans felt like the Christians "hated" them. The Christians were kind, gracious, loving, but just lived differently. It appears more likely that this led to the people wondering why the government hated the Christians.

#4: Still on the marriage issue, a shocking statement I hear in the debate is that married couples get something like 1500 more benefits from the government than single people.

Folks, a government that can give 1500 benefits to one class of people is a government that gives way, way too many benefits. Seriously. That's not just bad, that's truly hideous. Why? Because that means the married people are plundering the single people pretty ferociously. It also means that the government has 1500 ways to manipulate the behavior of people, at least, because those benefits can be taken or removed.

The benefits of marriage, from a government perspective, should be limited to allowing two people to share the resources of a household and reduce paperwork. For example, joint tax filing is a legitimate benefit, especially in a home with one primary wage-earner.

#5: Sports trivia of the week: we waste too much time and money on sports. Oh, wait, that's not trivia, is it?

Put your clothes on! Exodus 29

Crashing ahead through the whole Bible, we come to Exodus 29 (link). This is a description of the process of consecrating Aaron and his sons as priests. There is an extended process of sacrifice followed by step-by-step instructions of how to dress Aaron and sons as priests.

As you read through this passage, first of all, try not to be grossed-out by the details of animal sacrifice. This is not a passage to read just before a meal with its descriptions of blood here and fat there and entrails over there. We should find it instructive that the details are important enough to be commanded. If you wanted, you could say this applies that in some portions of life God has given commands down to the minute detail and those are to be followed.

Realize this, though: those areas are fewer and farther between than many of us claim.

The next thing to note is that atonement had to be made for the priests even though they were chosen by God to be the priests. That calling did not exclude them from sin or its consequences. In fact, additional sacrifices are made just for the priests because they need to make atonement for their sin so that they can make atonement for the sins of others. In the whole scope of the Bible, only three people make it into the world without sin, and only One stays that way. Adam and Eve start off pure but wreck that bus, while Jesus Himself is able to stay pure before God.

This whole ceremony showed Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and the others that being priests did not exclude them from sin. They should have been reminded by this moment that their access to God was not due to an inherent amazingness on their part, but rather was granted by the grace of God.

Additionally, I see something else important here. This ceremony should have scared off any wannabes from the priesthood. As an ordained Southern Baptist pastor, I can remember my ordination ceremony and this much I know, that no one put any kind of blood on my clothes. Nor did I have to wash with water in the midst of the church.

Really, I had to answer for my theological opinions and explain my desire to be ordained. Then I listened to a couple of sermons, listened to the whispered advice and prayers of assembled ministers, and that was that. It was not that hard to do. I’ve seen other people ordained even more easily and for lesser reasons, like tax deductions or so they can perform a friend’s wedding.

Then, somewhere down the road, this easy path to the pulpit opens the door to people saying and doing really, really embarrassing things and all ministers of the Gospel having to answer for their foolishness. Perhaps we should have a more difficult challenge ahead of us to be ministers. Maybe if we had to watch a few animal sacrifices or have some blood put on us, there would be a few less nutcases in the pulpit.

Here is the hinge, though: no longer are these animal sacrifices necessary. It is the Cross of Christ where the blood was spilt to pay for all of our sins. Even the sins of preachers, though these be multiplied in many, many ways. As such, there are no further sacrifices to be offered.

Instead, we should face the future with this idea in mind: no one should stand to the ministry that does not grasp how much it took for God to forgive his sin. No one who does not weep that it would have taken all of that suffering just to forgive him should take the role. Not ever. When we grasp that, we begin to be ready to speak to others on behalf of God.

Further for all of us is the truth that all of the sacrifices are done, and all of God’s people bear the responsibility and privilege of being priests for each other and the world at-large. This should come to our minds as we dress, as we worship, and as we walk throughout life. We are not free to do as we please, for our role is important, too important for us to trade for anything else.

Today’s Nerd Note: There is some value in noting that the commands of God to bring food establish that the food brought is to be shared with the priest. Many ancient religions claimed that the food was for the god, and then priests ate it later without telling anyone. Here, though, it is made clear that the food not consumed by the fire is for the priests to eat.

That openness should translate to modern church ministry in this way: most ministers are supported by the financial gifts given to the church they serve. The people bringing those gifts should know how much of the gifts their ministers “eat". Not your personal grocery budget, but the total that is headed to you in salary. It should not be a secret from those who give it. For the record, the church I serve sees each month the amount that I am paid and vote every year on that amount. No portion is hidden in any weird categories, either.

Also of note here is the command for continual sacrifices. It was the end of the sacrifices in A.D. 70 that marked the fall of Jerusalem more than the actual conquest of it.

Book: The Truth About Grace

One of the joys of the internet is that anybody can write a book review. One of the dangers of the internet is that anybody can write a book review. No matter how unqualified the reviewer may be in comparison to the writer---and today is no exception to that issue. After all, John MacArthur has spent more time preaching through the New Testament than I’ve been alive.

Nevertheless, the book was put out there for review, so I’m going to take a look at MacArthur’s The Truth About Grace.

First note: this book is part of a series of short books published by Thomas Nelson Publishers. Currently, there are three titles in the series. These are The Truth About: Grace; Forgiveness; and The Lordship of Christ. Each one is taken from previously published material of other books. That actually makes sense: the diversity of MacArthur’s prior books gives snippets about these subjects. Now, those are compressed into small volumes.

That is a critical note: these are small volumes. The whole series is, even though I’m just reviewing one. If you pay the cover price of $12.99, you might feel cheated. However, checking an online price or two shows the price somewhere less than half of that for either print or e-book, which makes much more sense.

To the content of The Truth About Grace: the claimed intention of this book is to make accessible Biblical teaching about the matter named in the title. This leaves the reader expecting a clearly-worded, easy-to-grasp explanation of the subject matter. In the case of “Grace,” MacArthur has hit that goal.

He does so by explaining his terms well, and then explaining the terms he used for definition if necessary. The reader is not left with “oh, grace means unmerited favor” but instead is given what “unmerited favor” means in view of Scripture. MacArthur does so without being condescending.

One area that will stir up a few will be MacArthur’s explanations of sovereign grace. If you swim in American Evangelical Christian seas for your theology, you are not going to be surprised that MacArthur connects his understanding of grace with the term Calvinism as well as connecting it with the Bible. He shows no fear of presenting that view of grace as not too be preferred but to be held as the only correct one. That may stir a few folks, but that is his view and he presents it well in the material selected here.

The greatest potential for this book, though, is blunted slightly by the lack of discussion questions or any form of study guide. This would make an excellent 5-7 week discussion starter for a small group or one-on-one Bible study, and I know that value added by the teacher developing their own questions would be good. However, a few starting points would make a nice addition to this text.

In all, I would recommend this for use in discussion groups or for individual learning. It will fit that bill nicely.

Note: free book from Thomas Nelson in exchange for the review. No demand was made that the review be positive. Of course, I picked a book I thought I would like.