Revolution by Biblical Encounter

By JimZ, 14 July, 2009, No Comment

“This is revolutionary!” So exclaimed, wonderingly more than radically, a young college student at a coffee shop Bible study I was leading a few years back.

To this young lady, meeting Yeshua/Jesus through an exploration of the Gospels was revolutionary. It was her own personal revolution in which truth was dethroning error in her belief system. The Gospels were taking her uninformed misconceptions about the Lord and His teachings and causing them to be radically and suddenly transformed. Scripture can, and should, trigger these personal faith revolutions in all of our lives.

I’ve been blessed to have had a number of such revolutionary experiences resulting from new encounters with Scripture. I’m not referring to that insight that comes, flashing or unfolding, through regular Scripture reading and study. That kind of encounter with God causes us to grow progressively more confident and proficient in our faith and practice.

What I’m talking about here is encountering God’s Word in a way that dramatically bring about a “paradigm shifting” revolution in our faith.

Here are a few that I found meaningful. Perhaps you can find your own spiritual “revolution” by adapting or adopting one of them to create your own radical encounter with God’s Word.

Each of these Bible encounters was intended to be faith building. They ended up faith changing. Changing not in the sense of gaining different beliefs, but as in gaining a different quality of belief.

  1. Read the Gospels to study Jesus in action. Pay attention to His word and actions and interrelationships. Look for themes and then categorize the entire Gospels according to these themes.
  2. Read the entire book of Romans (16 chapters) through once each day for thirty days.
  3. Read one chapter of the bible (typically only a few minutes) everyday. Increase the number of chapters read daily as you are ready to do so.

These three projects have brought tremendous new insights to my faith and practice. I’m sure there are many more of these “revolutionary” experiences as I continue to approach the Bible from different angles.

If one of them sparks and idea or interest, give it a try or come up with a project. None of those projects was related to school or ministry, they were for personal growth. Go ahead and give yourself a fun and challenging Bible project. I hope you too find many mind-blowing and faith altering revolutions in your own experiences with YHWH!

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

Pursuing the Perfect Church

By JimZ, 13 July, 2009, No Comment

Everyone wants to find, build, and/or attend the Perfect Church. The catch, of course, is that “perfect” is in the eye of the beholder. One person’s perfect is holiness while another person’s perfect is libertinism. And almost everybody else falls in the middle somewhere.

The Perfect Church is in fact a worthy goal for us to pursue. Why would we pursue an imperfect church? But the pursuit of perfection is only worthy in so far as the definition of perfect we use is consistent with biblical calls, commands, principles, and possibilities.

And who could provide us with that kind of definition better than the Messiah Himself? Happily, we can deduce the Lord’s definition of the perfect church from a few different places in scripture. One place we find such a definition is in the book of Revelation.

If we analyze carefully a series of “progress reports” the Lord gave to seven churches in Asia a while back, we can see very clearly what kind of church the Lord wants us to pursue. He actually tells us, over and over again, even verbally underlining, the one key bottom-line quality that He is seeking in a church. We know He wants us to be that type of church because that’s the type of behavior He promises to reward.

The progress reports for the seven churches can be found in chapters two and three of Revelation. Read them later if you like and see if you agree with my conclusion. Right now, though, let me clear away a whole bunch of details specific to the churches involved in order to clearly point out the one key detail that defines what the Lord wants from His church. We can then seek to apply that one key detail to our own church in order to build it to the Lord’s specs. This one key detail fits any type of church, in any age. Take a look:

  1. To the church of Ephesus:

    He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give…[reward]… (Revelation 2:7)

  2. To the church in Smyrna:

    He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall …[reward]… (Revelation 2:11)

  3. To the church in Pergamos:

    He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give …[reward]… (Revelation 2:17)

  4. To the church in Thyatira:

    And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give … [reward]… He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (Revelation 2:26-29)

  5. To the church in Sardis:

    He that overcometh, the same shall be …[reward]… He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (Revelation 3:5-6)

  6. To the church in Philadelphia:

    Him that overcometh will I make …[reward]… He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
    (Revelation 3:12-13)

  7. To the church of the Laodiceans:

    To him that overcometh will I …[reward]…He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (Revelation 3:21-22)

Did you catch what the Spirit was saying to the churches? It’s the churches that OVERCOME that get the reward. That’s what the Lord is looking for in His church: a church that overcomes.

Overcomes what? Challenges to its faith and practices. Which faith and practices? Depends on the situation of each individual church. Like the seven Asian churches it could be sexual sin, heresy, persecution, idolatry, indifference, even success that leads to haughtiness. The details for those churches are not as important as the details for your church.

What challenges to biblical faith and practice exist for your church? It is important to identify them and then commit to overcoming them. (I’m sure I don’t have to point out that we are to overcome in the name and power of the Lord by His Holy Spirit.)

We would do well to develop in our church body the mindset that challenges to our faith and practice are not a sign that something is wrong. We should remember that they are the canvas upon which our faith and practice take shape and develop relevance. Indeed, challenges are a sign that something is right because the Lord puts them there for us tackle! We need to embrace our challenges as overcomers in Christ’s name. That is the perfect church for us to aspire to become. May we all overcome everyday to the glory of God and His kingdom!

“Tweet” your friends to this! (Thanks!)

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

No Real Answer for Church in "Biblical Christian Tradition" that is Not Biblical

By JimZ, 12 July, 2009, No Comment

Where can we find answers to problems confronting the church today? Of course we know that God has them. And we do well by looking to God for them. But there is an oft made mistake of not looking for them in the right place. A common error, though well intentioned, is to look back to non-biblical “biblical Christian tradition” to guide our steps forward.

“Biblical Christian traditions” are often not, in fact, biblical even though they usually make that claim. For followers of the Messiah, this leads to a sad state of affairs which could have been avoided because Messiah Jesus has laid the solutions before us, if only we would have looked in the right place for them.

Jesus told us that the truth would set us free. As followers of Messiah Y’shua, it behooves us to make sure we go to the source of truth for Messiah’s people (and in fact all of God’s creation): God’s Word.

Here’s an opportunity to observe this side-tracking error in action. In an online article from The Charlotte Observer titled Evangelical Editor Picks a Quarrel with His Cohorts, Tim Funk reports on a new book by Warren Cole Smith. The article may be viewed at: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/faith/story/765051.html

Funk reports that Mr. Smith, an evangelical journalist and longtime editor of The Charlotte World, isn’t happy with the state of protestant evangelicalism, which the article puts at 26% of the entire US adult population.

In his new book, an insider critique called “A Lover’s Quarrel with the Evangelical Church” (Authentic Books, $16.99), Smith argues that many, if not most, evangelical churches have lost their way. Instead of sticking with core biblical principles, rich traditions and church-as-community, he says, they promote feel-goodism, technological fads and church-as-entertainment.

Yessss! Amen to that! Preach it, brother! Warren Cole Smith has spoken truth to our generation. May God grant many the grace to take these words to heart and act upon them. We must have more of this kind of godly introspection, and the boldness to face what we see revealed in ourselves, in the body of Christ today.

But we must also make sure we look to the right place for the solutions we seek. If evangelical protestantism has, as Mr. Smith puts it, “lost its way” it would do well to find the way back by consulting the right “roadmap.”

Herein lies the detour from the road to progress in this case:

So how would Smith save evangelicalism?

Among his answers: Make pastors accountable to deacon or elder boards. Urge churchgoers to discover the vocation God is calling them to. Recover face-to-face community. Develop a stronger sense of history. Plant new churches. And avoid easy answers.

“I’m not saying that I’ve got all the answers,” Smith concluded. “But I am saying we have a rich biblical Christian tradition that has given us many, many good answers. We’ve forgotten them. Let’s try to recover them.”

Some of Mr. Smith’s answers, as presented by Funk in this article, offer promise in moving God’s people in the right direction. Unfortunately, the first answer in the list above will kill any progress made by the others. It is indeed a part of Christian tradition, but it is not biblical. In fact, the idea has proven very destructive to the body of Christ.

Briefly, making pastors accountable to deacon or elder boards is counter to biblical teaching. Biblically, the office of deacon was not instituted to oversee and guide the pastor. The opposite is true…biblically. Acts 6 demonstrates that deacons were created to assist and free up pastors (who are to attend to work important in determining and following God’s lead). Deacons fulfill their biblical function by paying attention to the implementation of the every day work of the church (which is important to the people in the church and is vital to the efficient and effective fulfillment of God’s charge to minister to human needs).

Biblically deacons, and “elders” (that is, “elders” in the sense often used today which seems to be a fancy name for “deacon”), are to be a form of church management (as opposed to church leadership). These “managers” ensure and implement affairs of the church following the lead of the leader, the pastor. The pastor is charged with the responsibility of finding and communicating vision for where the church should go through prayer, Bible study and teaching (see Acts 6:4).

Both church offices, pastor and deacon, work together to enable the body to follow God’s lead while ensuring that nobody is left behind. In so doing, all move forward in God’s movement. That works, again biblically, when the pastor leads and the deacons support the pastor by committing themselves to managing the day-to-day work of ministry.

The idea of an “Elder board review” may be beneficial if it is carried out biblically. That is, if we remember that in the Bible an Elder is a pastor. Most current “Elder boards” are made up of non-pastors who oversee the pastor. Ironically, it is the pastor who is supposed to be the overseer.

If elder boards were made up of biblical elders (what we call “pastors”) then the review board could act as a sort of “peer review” process that might be a really good idea. Structured properly, it may allow the pastor (who is an elder) and the elders (who are other pastors, functionally though not necessarily formally) to act as partners in ensuring godly church leadership and direction. In that sense, an elder board would offer many benefits.

The issue of elders and deacons in biblical church leadership is not the point here. It is an important topic that will undoubtedly appear on this blog in future posts. The point being made here is that a historic but non-biblical answer is being presented as a biblical answer to lead the church out of a mess. Unfortunately, the proposed answer is, in my opinion, a large part of the reason the protestant evangelical church is facing the issues Mr. Smith identified.

What is the lesson for us? In most cases, the default tradition for gentile followers of Messiah Jesus is Christianity. But Christianity, as defined through centuries of tradition, is often at odds with God’s Word.

It is right for the followers of Messiah Jesus to look back for answers we need in order to move forward. But we must look back rightly. Christian tradition can be instructive to us, as can Jewish tradition for that matter. But ultimately, to be relevant to the Kingdom, we must measure the tradition we follow in pursuing our faith by the words of the Author and Finisher of our faith.

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

Default of Demas

By JimZ, 9 July, 2009, No Comment

Meet Demas. Perhaps you recognize his name as a footnote in a few of the shorter Pauline epistles. Scripture tells us very little about Demas. Nevertheless, a sliver of his story peeks out at us from between the lines of Paul’s final greetings in three epistles. This fleeting glimpse of Demas carries a simple message offering an important reminder to servants of Messiah Yeshua.

We are first introduced to Demas at the conclusion of Paul’s letter to the Colossians:

Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you. (Colossians 4:14)

The date and place of writing for Colossians is said to be about AD 60 or 61 during Paul’s house imprisonment in Rome. Paul’s letter to Philemon is placed in the same time period. Paul mentions Demas to Philemon also:

There salute thee Epaphras, my fellowprisoner in Christ Jesus; Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellowlabourers. (Philemon 1:23-24)

From these two brief mentions we can conclude that Demas, at that point of the story, was traveling in the same circles as such notables as Luke, Mark, and Aristarchus, not to mention the apostle Paul himself. We also know that Paul considered Demas to be a “fellowlaborer.”

How many others during that day rubbed elbows with Paul and were considered by him to be fellow laborers? Far more than ever made it into Paul’s farewell greetings. But Demas made it. He must have been very influential, involved, and important to Paul during that time.

But not all stories that start well end well. And therein lies the cautionary lesson of Demas to us. Fast forward 6 or 7 years to the writing of Paul’s second letter to Timothy:

For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia. (2 Timothy 4:10)

Demas had by that time defaulted on his status as a fellow laborer with Paul. What happened? Paul tells us: Demas had loved the present world more than sticking with Paul.

At that point, as I understand it, Paul was again imprisoned in Rome anticipating his death and communicating to the world through an 18-inch square opening in the ceiling of his dungeon. How disappointing to be abandoned by a fellow laborer at such a time. What a stark contrast to Paul himself, who just a few words before wrote:

I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith…(2 Timothy 4:7)

Perhaps a mental image of Demas came to Paul’s mind as he wrote:

No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier. (2 Timothy 2:4)

How disheartening and sad it can be to realize that those who serve in the kingdom faithfully by our side today may forsake us tomorrow when the Lord calls upon us to undertake the really rough assignments. Besides being disheartening and sad, it can also be scary.

It’s entirely possible that we too, like Demas, may forsake someone who was able to rely on us in the past. How far away are we from being the lovers of this world that can forsake those who rely on us in their hour of greatest need? Will we be found faithful when we face times too hard to stay the course with a fellow kingdom laborer? Or will we be tempted to take the more appealing walk away, thus forsaking a servant of the Lord who may be at the point of needing us most? Before answering these questions we would do well to humbly remember Paul’s words:

Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. (1 Corinthians 10:12)

The lessons learned in Demas’ example are simple but can have profound implications in times of testing for us and for others. First, we must remember that ultimately it is in the Lord we place our trust. We trust in the Lord to remain faithful to His promise and His call to us no matter who abandons us. Second, if the Lord places someone in a position of relying on us in their hour of need we would do well to be found faithful. We must humbly trust in the Lord to provide the strength, mercy, and grace necessary for us to remain faithful even when it is costly or difficult. This is especially true when there are options open to us personally that are more attractive or easier to face.

We must remember the message of Demas. We must keep faith in the Lord as we labor in His kingdom, and we must stay faithful in the Lord to our fellow kingdom laborers.

“Tweet” your friends to this! (Thanks!)

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

Sodom’s Other Sin

By JimZ, 8 July, 2009, No Comment

Sure, Sodom was a bad place. But you may only know the half of it. You know what I’m talking about, don’t you? That other practice that merited God’s annihilation that is always left unmentioned. Not sure you know what I mean? It’s important.

We all remember how wicked Sodom was just from the brief glimpse of events at the Lot household on the eve of the city’s destruction. The wicked townspeople mobbed Lot’s house demanding that he hand over the two visiting strangers who were spending the night under his roof.

Do you remember being troubled that Lot would offer his two virginal daughters to the despicably wicked townsfolk in order to spare the two visiting strangers the intended abuse of the mob? As unimaginable an offer as that might seem to us, even that extreme measure was not enough to appease the mob. In fact, it only served to inflame the crowd to more violence.

As a stunning testimony to the depth of their depravity, when the two visitors interceded by “smiting” the mob with blindness, the wicked were still not belayed from their pursuit of evil. They were stopped only because “they wearied themselves to find the door” in their blinded condition. That’s a mob on a mission! See Genesis 19 if you need a refresher on all the gory details.

Anyway, the brief glimpse of Sodom’s evil in Genesis sure paints a vivid picture in the reader’s mind. Imagine the impression the actual events must have made on YHWH! Interestingly enough, the perverted depravity of Sodom was only a part of what didn’t sit right with Him. The prophet Ezekiel sheds some light on what else really made a bad impression on Him:

Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good. (Ezekiel 16:49-50)

Can this be? Sodom’s abominable behavior is mentioned last in YHWH’s grievance list here. What sins ranked right up there with all their depravity? Alas, the unmentioned other sin of Sodom:

pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

Sodom might have been morally depraved, but its people were not materially deprived. The town apparently had an abundance of material goods. According to the quoted verse, the people generally had all the food they wanted, an abundance of leisure time, and even reason to boast and be haughty.

According to Ezekiel here, a part of the reason Sodom was charged with iniquity and subsequently destroyed, was that they failed to help the poor and needy among them with a “hand up” in spite of the fact that they had an abundance of resources at their command. And that, as the late great radio commentator Paul Harvey used to say, is the rrrresssssst of the story!

How about that? Wicked Sodom brought down, in part, because they stopped up their ears to the cries of the poor. They had resources to overcapacity and yet they did not use some of those resources to help put the poor in better standing by “strengthening” their hand.

YHWH sent the hard-headed and set-jawed Ezekiel (see Ezekiel 3:8-9) to point out very clearly that His people had reached the point of making Sodom look sainted in comparison.

And now we have the Holy Spirit pointing these words out to us. So how about us? We might have our eternal “p’s and q’s” in order, but what about our earthly “dollars and cents?” Beware the Other sin of Sodom. It runs rampant in our own society today. Let it not be said of Messiah’s people in this generation: “They gave Sodom a run for the money.”

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

The "Poor" Nicking the Poor

By JimZ, 7 July, 2009, No Comment

Homeless or not, desperate or not, they all have their strategies, each one forged in the blast oven of the streets.

“Panhandling isn’t just a job. It’s an art,” said Cliff Stewart, 49, who has worked the I-275 22nd Avenue N exit in St. Petersburg since he got out of prison two years ago.

You have to know what moves people most: beer and God.

So goes the wisdom of the street as reported in the St. Petersburg Times by Lane DeGregory, Times staff writer, on July 6, 2009.

The article, Panhandlers Have Many Strategies for Getting People’s Sympathy in Order to Make Money, was online here as of the posting of this blog entry, but these links don’t last long. I hope you get to read it because it offers good insight into the “business” of being poor and “begging alms.”

Here’s some more insight gleaned from the article:

Though their signs say they’re homeless, few panhandlers seem to sleep outside….

Ogdee, outside the Bayshore Publix, sets his weekly quota at $800. His income has never fallen short in the four months he has held “Homeless. Anything helps. God bless!”

“I’m paid a week in advance on my rent,” he said. “I got a load of food in my motel fridge.”

He insists he’s not panhandling. “I’m not asking for nothing. I’m just holding a sign.”

So what does he call it? He laughs.

“Making money.”

Of course, that money often comes from those who experience hardship themselves and therefore can least afford to be conned:

People in BMWs and Lexuses won’t look at you, the panhandlers say. People in beaters give the most. When someone gives you money, that’s a hit. Or a lick. Try to look friendly but not too happy. Remember, you’re hurting.

Those of us who feel obligated to answer the cry of the poor according to our ability (and meager ability at that) have to wrestle with each request for help (for instance, see my blog post here). Even with all “due diligence” we are still more often than not being cheated. The quote above calls our charity a “lick” or a “hit.” I call it a “nick” as in “I just got nicked by that crook.” And getting nicked means there is less for us to give to those who really do need it.

Those who cry poor but don’t really have a need are thieves. They steal from the poor both directly and indirectly. These abusers of the good will of people take what little is available inappropriately. In the process, they make it harder for those with a real need to find help because everyone has been forced to become overly cynical and suspicious of requests for charity.It’s not a job, it’s not an art. It’s immoral.

May the Lord have mercy on the souls of those who, out of ignorance, ask for charity when they don’t need it. May the Merciful One deliver the real poor from the oppression of these crooks. And may the Giver of Wisdom give to His people wisdom and discernment to see where real need exists and who has those real needs.

“Tweet” your friends to this! (Thanks!)

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

The Fiddler and the Fifth Commandment

By JimZ, 6 July, 2009, 2 Comments

My family and I had a chance to watch “Fiddler on the Roof” again after having seen it once before a number of years ago. I noticed something this time around about the end of the movie that was interesting.

To make a long (and very entertaining) story short: The movie, an adaptation for screen by Joseph Stein of a book by Sholom Aleichem, takes place in tsarist Russia about 1905. It centers on a poor milkman named Tevye and the marriages of three of his daughter. Tevye attempts to hold on to his traditions of faith and family but they are encroached upon by social and political change that is swiftly laying the groundwork for the Russian Revolution that will take place in about a dozen years.

Tevye has to wrestle with the choice of husband made by his three eldest daughters: Tzeitel, Hodel, and Chava. Traditionally Tevye should have chosen the husbands. But in the changing times, each of the daughters ends up making her own choice. Each one chooses in a progressively more rebellious move away from the family and religious traditions that have held Tevye’s people together for generations. Tevye must respond as his faith is allowed to bend.

Tzeitel, the eldest, pleads with her father to allow her to marry her childhood friend rather than the man who has been arranged with the help of a matchmaker. For the sake of his daughter’s happiness, he accepts the social embarrassment of a broken deal with the arranged marriage and gives his permission and blessing to the wedding of his daughter’s wishes.

Hodel comes next. She becomes smitten by the charms of a revolutionary Russian Jew who is out to change the world for the benefit of the working man. He travels to the small town from university, and then after a short stay he is called away for revolutionary rallies in the big cities and asks Hodel to marry him. They approach Tevye who refuses. When informed that the couple was not seeking his permission but only his blessing, Tevye again considers his daughter’s happiness and gives his blessing. He also insists on giving his “permission” which is respectfully not rejected by the young couple.

The third daughter, Chava, meets a non-Jewish Russian boy working in a field and is drawn to him through their mutual love of reading books. The two eventually approach Tevye, who forbids Chava to see the young man ever again. Chava runs away and gets married to the boy in a Russian Orthodox Church. Tevye has reached the breaking point of his faith and will not go past it. He considers Chava to be dead though it obviously breaks his heart.

In the end, the tsar forces the local authorities to expel all Jews from their small hometown. The movie ends up with the various characters saying goodbye to Tevye as they pass him on the street. Each discusses where they are going as they go their own separate ways.

The direction Tevye and his remaining family,Tzeitel, Hodel, and Chava go in is interesting and I wonder if it was intentional, coincidental, or an act of the author’s subconscious. It seems that each ends up in a direction that potentially might lead to bigger blessings to those keeping the fifth commandment, and more heartbreak and hardship for those who depart from honoring their parents.

So here is the set-up for potential sequels for each of their lives after Russia: Tevye, who throughout the movie maintained a casual, sometimes irreverent, but always respectful and faithful relationship with the Lord, ends up going to stay with family in New York. His days of drudgery pulling his milk wagon along his delivery route with his lame horse dragging behind seem to be coming to an end. He is also being brought to a place in which he will be protected from the coming political upheaval already forming.

Tzeitel, and her husband and newborn child, are saving up enough money to join Tevye and family in New York. Tzeitel’s husband is a tailor. Presumably in New York he has the potential for a more lucrative business than in the small peasant/working class town he grew up in. They, and their child, would also be removed from the political windstorm looming on the horizon.

Hodel and her revolutionary husband have scored a somewhat harder life. Her husband, having been arrested for his political activities, ended up in prison in Siberia. Hodel had earlier taken the train there to be with him. The last report in a letter that Tevye got was that Hodel spent her days working in Siberia and her husband sat in prison. Certainly a disappointing and difficult outcome. On a brighter side, there was the potential that after the revolution to come in twelve years, he might be freed and they could begin their family in the new Russia, perhaps with some political or social standing as early fighters for the revolutionary cause.

Chava, the third daughter and the one who made the most rebellious choice of husband potentially fared the worst. Chava and her non-Jewish husband attempt to talk with Tevye and his family before departing. They inform Tevye that they are going to Krakow, Poland because they refuse to live under the rule of people who would do such things as persecute the Jews. Ironically, Chava and her by-then grown family would be forced to live under people who would do even worse things to Jews than were done under tsarist Russia. At about 17 years old in the setting of the movie, she would be around 50 years old in Poland to witness Hitler’s devastation to the country, and about mid-to-late 50′s to see Stalin’s rule. After having survived by living as Gentiles, she, her children, and even her grandchildren could conceivably find themselves under Stalinist Russian rule locked behind an iron curtain that would not be lifted again in her natural lifetime.

These potential scenarios arising from the conclusion of the movie were not played out so we don’t have any idea where the author would have taken the stories. But it’s interesting that the stage that was set for the characters at the end of the movie would have naturally, barring any intervention on the author’s part, allowed these scenarios to be sequels to the Fiddler on the Roof.

I don’t think the intended message of the author in this ending is to illustrate that progressively moving away from obeying the fifth commandment leads to progressively harder living down the road. But it is interesting to see that is the way things happened to have been written. Coincidence? Or was it the subconscious of someone steeped in Jewish moral thought from an early age speaking up to put a few finishing touches on this story to make it something of a modern morality play?

“Tweet” your friends to this! (Thanks!)

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

An Honor and a Delight

By JimZ, 3 July, 2009, No Comment

Another Sabbath upon us. It is an honor and a delight to be privileged to celebrate YHWH/God’s weekly appointed time of rest and repose. YHWH has had a standing invitation to us Gentiles to participate in His Sabbath, take hold of His covenant, and receive his blessings along with it for thousands of years:

Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the YHWH, to serve him, and to love the name of the YHWH, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people. (Isaiah 56:6-7)

Now, through Yeshua, we are “children of Abraham” by faith, even “temples” of the Holy Spirit, and “heirs” of the Kingdom. We are certainly not “strangers” to YHWH anymore. Surely now we have all the more reason to hold to the fourth commandment as much as we hold to the other nine.

Shabbat Shalom. I look forward to being back, by YHWH’s mercy, next week.

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

Are You Building on a Shifty or a Shiftless Foundation?

By JimZ, 30 June, 2009, 2 Comments

Are you building on a shifty or a shiftless foundation? Hopefully not on either! That’s a trick question because “shifty” means “tricky or untrustworthy” and “shiftless” means “lazy.” It does not mean shifting vs. stable, as it might appear at first glance.

Unfortunately, many are unwittingly building their faith and lives in Messiah on a “sand” foundation because of either shifty or shiftless teaching of a simple but important “foundational” principle in Messiah’s kingdom. This can be observed in a classic mistake in the teaching of a classic parable.

You’ve heard, of course, the parable of Yeshua in Matthew chapter 7:

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. (Matthew 7:24-27)

You have probably heard, as I have, a number of sermons that misapply what Messiah is teaching here. The dangerous result is that hearers of these, at worst, “shifty” or, at best, “shiftless” teachings on this parable may end up not hearing the vitally important point of the parable. They may very well end up building their house on shifting sand because of the wrong understanding of these verses.

Let’s not make that mistake ourselves. Let’s look first at the error, and then we’ll look at the very important detail often missed that allows for a correct interpretation and application of Messiah’s teaching here.

You may have heard this parable taught, often in missions-oriented messages, as demonstrating the difference between building on Christ (the solid Rock, after all) versus building on “all other ground, which is shifting sand” as the famous hymn reminds us. The meaning assigned to this passage is that belief in Christ is solid, belief in anything else is not so solid.

Okay, I can go along with that concept as true. But it is not what is taught in the parable here. And the danger is that the “true-but-not-taught-here” message will cause us to miss the more important message for followers of Messiah that is taught in this parable.

A moderately careful reading of the text here plainly shows that the issue here is not a solid foundation of Christ versus a shifty foundation of non-Christ. What separates the wise from the foolish here is something else. Let’s look at the key detail in the text:

whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man…every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man

See it? If not, here it is again with emphasis:

whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them[=]wise…every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not[=]foolish

As you can plainly see, the issue here is not having Christ’s teachings versus having some other teaching than Christ. Both the wise and the foolish here have Christ’s teaching. So what’s the problem? Everything for one of them! The wise man is the one who DOES Messiah’s teachings, the foolish man is the one who DOES NOT DO Messiah’s teachings in spite of the fact that he has them. The issue around Messiah’s teachings here is “doing” versus “not doing” rather than “having” versus “not having.”

And that leaves a whole lot of “Christians” with beach homes rather than mountain cabins. How many of us who claim the name of Christ hear his teachings weekly, even daily perhaps, but don’t do them? Very very foolish indeed.

It is the doing of Messiah’s teaching that is the “cement” that makes the “sand particles” of individual scriptural teachings bind together into a cohesive whole, or solid “rock,” for us to build our lives upon wisely. If we leave out the doing, we have no experience with disconnected teachings to solidify them in our thought and actions. We would shift, shudder, and ultimately washout when the forces of sinful nature (ours and others) hit us with any amount of fury.

To further emphasize the point Yeshua makes here, let’s place this parable back into its context by looking at the immediately preceding teaching that leads Yeshua into telling this parable for illustrative purposes:

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:21-23)

Very serious words for all who claim to follow Yeshua HaMashiach! Notice who is in trouble here: the ones who know the right name (saying “Lord, Lord”) and the religiously active (who have prophesied in the Lord’s name, cast out devils in the Lord’s name, and did “many wonderful works” in the Lord’s name).

Not only are they in trouble here because they will not enter the kingdom of heaven, but they are rejected of Christ (“I never knew you: depart from me”) and they are charged with being “workers of iniquity.” Imagine the shock that awaits some. No, wait, not just some. Yeshua said “Many will say to me in that day…”.

The parable of building on the rock and building on the sand illustrates the clear teaching of Messiah to His people: hear my words and do them. One day many followers of Messiah will find that they have deceived themselves by being hearers of the word only and not doers. Those are the words of the Lord’s half-brother, James:

But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed. (James 1:22-25)

As James says further, the blessing of the word is in the doing, not in the hearing.

The teachings of Christ are at our fingertips. There is no issue for us of having or not having them. We might need to read, study and meditate on them, but we have them if we pursue them. The issue for us, as taught in Matthew 7, is whether or not we are doing the teachings of Christ.

That is what separates the wise from the foolish, and also those who know they are saved from those who only think they are saved. The stakes are eternally high. Now is the day for us to secure the foundation we build on. Study and learn, yes we must. But then it is imperative that we actually apply what we have learned to our everyday life. Anything else is shifting sand.

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

In Man We Trust (Not)

By JimZ, 25 June, 2009, No Comment

“Jesus, save us from your followers.” So read a bumper sticker I saw as I walked down the street a number of years ago. Rather than take offense, I thought it voiced perfectly the problem with Christianity: Christians.

It has been said that Gandhi was impressed with the person and teaching of Jesus, but rejected Christianity because of the way His followers acted. (phony-followers I would say, but to non-believers we are all lumped together.)

But it’s not just non-believers who have a problem with Christians. We all have problems with Christians if we have been around in the church any length of time at all. They can be an extremely petty, nasty, self-absorbed and vicious lot. Don’t even get me started telling you what I really think.

Perhaps it has something to do with a supposed “Get Out of Hell Free” card, printed up and delivered by the thousands, from their local Monopoly church. Maybe they figure we’re obligated to forgive them. Maybe they think the Lord died for them because they are so special. Who knows? Who cares? Why waste precious time figuring it out?

Anyway, it’s your own fault if you lose your faith in the Messiah after getting burned by so called followers of His. Don’t go blaming it on Him or His church as many do.

You would have done well if you had asked WDJD (What Did Jesus Do) rather than acting on WITJWD (What I Think Jesus Would Do) when it comes to those with whom you fellowship.

Are you placing too much trust in other believers? If so, you aren’t following the way of the Master:

Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did. But Jesus did not commit [entrust] himself unto them, because he knew all men, And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man. (John 2:23-25)

Jesus didn’t misplace his trust by putting it in men, even those who for the moment appeared to be behind him. So, since we have the example of our Lord, why would we be fooled into doing so?

Many-a-person’s faith has been shipwrecked because of a misplaced trust in fellow believers (who are actually, more often than not, the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing). I write from personal experience.

So how can a true Christian fellowship be built without trust? It can’t. Trust is a necessary ingredient in building a fellowship with other believers that is both nurturing to us and is also effective in kingdom building in the name of the Messiah. The key is in where we place our trust:

Trust in the LORD, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed. Delight thyself also in the LORD; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. Commit thy way unto the LORD; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass. And he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noonday. (Psalms 37:3-6)

See? We aren’t to place our trust in others. We aren’t even to place our trust in ourselves to get the job done. It is Messiah who builds His church, not us. We must place our trust in Him when dealing with other believers.

We must trust Him to protect us from unscrupulous pseudo-believers. We must trust Him to give us wisdom and patience when working with immature believers. We must trust God to continue His work in us, conforming us to the image of Yeshua, so that we are trustworthy in our dealings with others. We must trust Him in all cases for the fruit of the Spirit.

It is the Spirit that provides us with the quality of character vitally necessary to work in a godly way among a people who, though in the process of sanctification, still reflect the sin-warped world from which they emerge. And we must never forget that we, also, are in that same lot.

Don’t entrust yourself to mankind. Whatever you do, don’t entrust yourself to other Christians. Don’t even trust yourself to get the job done. Entrust yourself to the Lord and then conduct yourself faithfully to Him in your dealings with all mankind, believer or not. Just like Yeshua did.

Please Enjoy and Share!
  • email
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • MySpace
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MSN Reporter
  • Live

© 2009-2012 JimBlogZ All Rights Reserved. Permission to reproduce and distribute individual articles (posts) hereby granted if the following four conditions are met: 1) The article must be reproduced without modifications of any kind, either in length or content. 2) Author’s name and copyright information, including these permission conditions must appear with article. 3) Author’s contact information (jim@JimBlogZ.com | www.JimBlogZ.com) must appear with article. 4) Article must be freely distributed without charge or financial gain.