To begin with, let me explain something: Most Christians do not seperate Luke from Paul from Peter and so on. The Bible is read as a whole without any differenciation between the different authors. This is both good, and not so good. It is good because the Bible is all God's word, and needs to be taken as a whole; but it is also not so good because we lose the individuality of each book/of each author. Paul thinks differently than Luke or Matthew or any other book in the Bible. Luke is different than the other Gospel writers and has his own distinct emphases.
Matthew, Mark and Luke all wrote gospels about Jesus that were very similar (John's was very different); but each one of them stressed different teachings about what Jesus had to say. Luke's gospel is the one that stressed the importance of handling money well.
Throughout the book of Luke, Jesus talked about how we get trapped by and choked out by the need to have more, and by the concerns over what we do have. When he called people to follow him and to enter the kingdom of God, they were asked to leave everything, which rich men, who gained their money in socially acceptable ways could not do. However, rich men who gained their money in bad ways (such as tax collecting on Rome's behalf) were willing to give up everything and follow Jesus.
JESUS' TEACHINGS - THE KINGDOM BELONGS TO THE POOR, NOT TO THE RICH
Let me explain through Jesus' teachings how this all works....
Luke 6:20: Looking at his disciples, he said: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God." This pretty much summed it up. In Matthew, Jesus said, "blessed are the poor in spirit," but in Luke, he said, "Blessed are the poor." According to Luke, the kingdom belonged to the poor and powerless; not to the rich, the powerful, and the popular. In Luke Jesus said, "Woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your reward." According to Luke, the rich got everything on earth, and God chose the poor to be the recipients of his kingdom.
Paul changed this teaching a bit, but still held to its basics when he wrote to the Corinthians, "Think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influencial; not many were of noble birth (1 Corinthians 1:26)."
Paul saw that not many rich and noble were called, however, Luke very clearly divided between the rich and the poor. The poor get the kingdom and the rich don't.
JESUS' TEACHINGS - HOW CAN A RICH MAN ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN AND BE SAVED?
Even though there was a great divide between rich and poor in Luke, there was hope for the rich in Luke. To put it very bluntly, the rich could only enter the kingdom by buying friends with the money they had...not just any friend (remember the prodigal son bought a lot of friends who failed him in his time of need), they had to buy the kinds of friends who would welcome them into the kingdom - the kingdom that Jesus offered to the poor. Although there are a few examples in the book of Luke, the teaching itself is made most evident in Luke 16.
Before I open up the parable in Luke 16 and look into the explanation that Jesus gave concerning the parable, let me take you back to Matthew's gospel. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus talked about those who would make it on judgment day and those who would be rejected. We expect Jesus to open up a large book (Revelation 20:15) and look to see if each person has "been born again (John 3:3)." But not so in Matthew and not so in Luke. In Matthew (25:31-46), those who make it to heaven, did so because they fed the hungry, visited the sick and the lonely, clothed the naked and so on...no more, no less.
Now back to Luke...
In chapter Luke 16, Jesus told a parable about a steward (the head business man of a wealthy household) who was about to lose his job because he was mismanaging the householder's finances. The steward saw that he was in a bind - he had a good job and didn't want to have to be stuck with a lousy one - so he quickly maneuvered to get himself another good job when his time was up.
He called together people who owed his boss money and worked out awesome deals with them, letting them pay back smaller amounts. His dealings made the other household owners happy, thus giving the steward the connections he needed to have as he faced unemployment.
Even though what the steward did was dishonest, Jesus commended him for his cleverness. But Jesus didn't stop with this being a lesson on cleverness, he had 3 lessons garnered from the parable.
1. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light (Lk 16:8).
People in the world deal better with impending disasters of the world (such as job loss) than people of faith do with impending kingdom and eternal disaster. Why? Because when people of the world see impending worldly disaster, they (like the steward in the parable) prepare for it; but even though the kingdom and judgment of God is coming, the people of faith do not bother to prepare themselves appropriately for that coming disaster.
2. Use your worldly resources to benefit others and make friends. Then, when your earthly possessions are gone, they will welcome you to an eternal home (Lk 16:9 NLT).
I chose this translation because the version reflects well the meaning of this verse. In the original Greek, there is one word for "they may receive..." It is just as this translation states..."they may receive...." The NIV is one of the few versions that misses this. So why is this important? And who are "they?"
In the parable the steward was trying to get himself into a new home for a good job. Jesus concluded his parable with a lesson that we should do the same - in the face of a coming judgment (a kingdom coming upon us made for the poor and for the powerless), use our money to get friends who will welcome us into that kingdom.
Those people who are called "they" are the ones who hold the future of rich people in their hands. Remember Matthew 25? Remember that those who were rejected from eternity with Christ were those who neglected the needy? This is a different angle of the same judgment. This angle shows us that the poor, the powerless, and the abused of this world hold the power in the world to come. They are the ones who welcome some of the rich into eternal dwellings and they are the ones who turn away other rich people from eternal dwellings. This is clearly spelled out in another parable from Luke 16 - the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.
3. The third lesson Jesus gave about the parable seems to contradict the first.
Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches (Lk 16:10-11)?
This third lesson from the same parable tells us that although the steward was very clever in preparing for a new job, he may have ruined his possiblity of getting a job with the people he helped out. Those households that got the great break knew they were getting a break because of this steward, but they also saw that the break they were getting cost the owner of the steward's house dearly. If he did that to his present owner, how could he be trusted for the next? As the proverb goes, "A leapord cannot change its spots."
This third lesson from the Parable of the Steward instructs us to be smart with money; because if we deal with it unethically, we cannot and will not be trusted with eternal responsibilities. In other words, what we do with our money now will have consequences in the next life.
Now let's get back to the second of these 3 lessons - the subject of buying friends for eternal homes.
EXAMPLES OF FAILURES IN LUKE
Right after Jesus gave the parable of the steward who bought friends for the future, he gave us an example, a parable, of someone who did not prepare for his future - The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. In this parable, Lazarus received the highest reward in the coming kingdom only because he was poor and miserable in this life; while the rich man received eternal torment because he was rich in this life. Luke 6's "Blessed are the poor, woe to you who are rich" was spelled out in detail by Abraham: "Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony (Lk 16:25)."
In torment the rich man looked to Abraham to help him and then looked indirectly to Lazarus for a small favor. The parable shows us that Abraham could not and would not help the rich man; furthermore the parable lets us see that Lazarus was silent during the entire time. No one wanted to or could help the rich man out because he did not help the poor man who lived and died at his gate.
Jesus further emphasized this same lesson in chapter 18 when a rich ruler came to him and asked him what he had to do to inherit eternal life. Jesus told him to sell everything and give to the poor. When the rich man heard this he was sad because he didn't want to let go of his money, which was, as far as we know, obtained honestly; and as I stated before, the rich with honest money had a harder time letting go of it than those who became wealthy in socially unacceptable ways.
These cases along with other teachings of Jesus in the book of Luke clearly show us that salvation, entering the kingdom of God, and finding eternal life depends upon being poor or giving money to those who are poor. Wealth in this world is a huge barrier to eternal life.
EXAMPLES OF SUCCESS IN LUKE
One who did it right in Luke was Zaccheus (Lk 19:1-10) who gave half his money to feed the poor, returned fourfold to those he cheated, and as a result found salvation.
EXAMPLE IN ACTS
The book of Acts was also written by Luke as a follow up to the book of Luke. Luke recorded the ministry of Jesus while Acts followed the beginnings of the early church. Early on, as the church just started, Chirstians had all things in common because people who had possessions, gave to those who did not have.
There were no needy people among them, because those who owned land or houses would sell them and bring the money to the apostles to give to those in need (Acts 4:34-35).
When it came to possessions and money, the early church followed Jesus' teachings that were clearly presented in the book of Luke.
REPENTANCE
As much as Luke focused on giving money, he also brought up the need to repent (or a better translation would be "to turn around"). Actually, he stressed repentance in Acts more than the book of Luke.
John the Baptist started baptizing before Jesus, preaching and warning people to turn away from their sins. Yet when people heard him preach and wanted to be baptized, John wouldn't baptize them until they had showed the fruit of repentance.
THE FRUIT OF REPENTANCE
According to John the Baptist, the way we can measure one's repentance (the fruit of repentance) was defined by what office one bore as a human being:
To the general people he said share what you have. If you have an extra car, give one to the person who can't afford any. The early church practiced this; everybody had all things in common.
He told tax-collectors/businessmen to be honest and follow the rules of ethics.
And finally he told soldiers/policemen to put away unnessesary violence and learn how to live with the salary they had without complaining.
BAPTISM
In the book of Luke, John the Baptist baptised, but Jesus did not; but in the Book of Acts we see people were baptised by the disciples and other church members. So if I include the Book of Acts, I would summarize Luke's thought like this:
To enter the kingdom of heaven and to gain eternal life, you must repent (turn around), be baptized, and show the fruits of repentance by sharing all you have with those who need. Anything less was unacceptable.
LAST THOUGHTS
After a few years in 1st Century Jerusalem, other than small communities and certain individuals that came and went from time to time in the past 2,000 years, the church as a whole never returned to having all things in common.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Was Jesus Wealthy? Was John Poor?
"For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and "sinners (Luke 7:33-34)." '
This is one of the verses used by some people to suggest that Jesus lived a wealthy lifestyle. The verse supports prosperity preachers in living with a crud load of money, jets, expensive suits, expensive cars and neat houses. " Jesus was rich," they say, "so I should be as well." In fact, wealth becomes simply one more marker of how spiritual and giving one is.
Personally, I think a better set of verses to explain prosperity teaching is found in Luke 20:46 - 21:4. Here we find 2 stories connected to each other. The first is a rebuke to the scribes who robbed from the widows who were the poorest of the poor, and the second story is the story of one of those widows who gave everything she had to the temple so people like the scribes could live a good life.
Back to the question: Was Jesus wealthy?
As I read the Gospels, I believe that Jesus had short term money gained from donations, possibly on a regular basis. Luke 8:3 tells us that Jesus had certain donors: Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod's business manager; Susanna; and many others who were contributing from their own resources to support Jesus and his disciples. This type of support did not enable Jesus to buy a home, build a business or buy a car. There was nothing that provided Jesus with financial security for the future.
I don't find any poor widows supporting Jesus in the Bible, but they probably donated to his ministry. The Bible does mention that there were wealthy ladies helping him from their abundance, and the Bible does mention that Jesus was very hard on those whose support relied on the donations of the very poor.
The Gospels also tell us that Jesus ate and drank and celebrated (perhaps partied) with sinners and tax-collectors. Jesus was prophetically celebrating the arrival of the kingdom of God.
Was John the Baptist Poor?
John grew up in a priestly household that may have been in the upper class, but he chose instead a life of poverty. Furthermore, he may have lived in poverty for only the months or few years of his ministry.
There is no mention in the Bible of how John got his money, maybe he got it the same way Jesus did.
CONCLUSIONS
Although Jesus had supporters for his ministry, his support was temporary. When he died, he had nothing left - no house, no car (when he entered Jerusalem he borrowed a donkey which was by no means a high end model of traveling), no 401K, life insurance, bank account, or any other means of hoarding or protecting what he had. When he died, the only clothes he had were taken from him.
In his ministry, he never dressed in upper class clothing.
Jesus may have received a decent salary as he traveled around, but he did not have enough to save anything or give himself a comfortable life.
This is one of the verses used by some people to suggest that Jesus lived a wealthy lifestyle. The verse supports prosperity preachers in living with a crud load of money, jets, expensive suits, expensive cars and neat houses. " Jesus was rich," they say, "so I should be as well." In fact, wealth becomes simply one more marker of how spiritual and giving one is.
Personally, I think a better set of verses to explain prosperity teaching is found in Luke 20:46 - 21:4. Here we find 2 stories connected to each other. The first is a rebuke to the scribes who robbed from the widows who were the poorest of the poor, and the second story is the story of one of those widows who gave everything she had to the temple so people like the scribes could live a good life.
Back to the question: Was Jesus wealthy?
As I read the Gospels, I believe that Jesus had short term money gained from donations, possibly on a regular basis. Luke 8:3 tells us that Jesus had certain donors: Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod's business manager; Susanna; and many others who were contributing from their own resources to support Jesus and his disciples. This type of support did not enable Jesus to buy a home, build a business or buy a car. There was nothing that provided Jesus with financial security for the future.
I don't find any poor widows supporting Jesus in the Bible, but they probably donated to his ministry. The Bible does mention that there were wealthy ladies helping him from their abundance, and the Bible does mention that Jesus was very hard on those whose support relied on the donations of the very poor.
The Gospels also tell us that Jesus ate and drank and celebrated (perhaps partied) with sinners and tax-collectors. Jesus was prophetically celebrating the arrival of the kingdom of God.
Was John the Baptist Poor?
John grew up in a priestly household that may have been in the upper class, but he chose instead a life of poverty. Furthermore, he may have lived in poverty for only the months or few years of his ministry.
There is no mention in the Bible of how John got his money, maybe he got it the same way Jesus did.
CONCLUSIONS
Although Jesus had supporters for his ministry, his support was temporary. When he died, he had nothing left - no house, no car (when he entered Jerusalem he borrowed a donkey which was by no means a high end model of traveling), no 401K, life insurance, bank account, or any other means of hoarding or protecting what he had. When he died, the only clothes he had were taken from him.
In his ministry, he never dressed in upper class clothing.
Jesus may have received a decent salary as he traveled around, but he did not have enough to save anything or give himself a comfortable life.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Take Nothing with You
Take nothing for your journey," he instructed them. "Don't take a walking stick, a traveler's bag, food, money, or even a change of clothes (Luke 9:3).
When Jesus sent his disciples into villages, he gave them several instructions:
1. Preach the kingdom of God.
2. Heal the sick.
3. Take nothing but the basics.
4. Stay in one house only.
5. If you are not received, shake off your feet as a testimony against them.
When Luke said not to take any of the basics he broke it down to these:
1. A walking stick
2. A traveler's bag
3. Food
4. Money
5. A change of clothes
Jesus was giving commands to his disciples. This does not mean that he tells modern day missionaries and pastors to go out without anything.
GOING WITHOUT SUPPORT
There are missionaries who go into other countries without any support. Following this verse, they go out by faith, expecting to be cared for by God, as they win mulitiudes to Christ. Unfortunately, it usually doesn't work out like as these people hope. They become burdens on other missionaries who are supported by their home churches and organizations.
As one who served overseas for over 4 years, I can say that when people go out without financial and prayer support, they are almost always making a mistake. The apostle Paul always had a church or churches supporting him in fasting, prayer, finances, and by sending fellow missionaries. It seems that Paul believed that this verse was intended soley for the disciples that followed Jesus.
VISITING PEOPLE'S HOMES
Some early missionaries took different paths than Paul did. Paul had sending churches such as Antioch and Rome. Paul also had financial support from other churches and from working on his own. He never received money from the churches he was starting. On the other hand, there were missionaries who came after him who used different methods.
The new style missionaries had no sending churches that we know of...they also had no financial support. They went from Christian home to another, ministering in the communities.
It wasn't long before they began creating problems. Some missionaries discovered that there were homes that were very welcoming, and so the traveling missionary never left. These missionaries divided churches in the first and second centuries.
2 and 3 John addresses some of these people. John gave several rules:
1. If they don't preach Jesus Christ come in the flesh, don't receive them at all.
2. If they preach the incarnation, welcome them.
Diotrephes, a member of 3 John church, wanted nothing to do with any of these traveling missionaries, and threw out anyone who received them into their homes. John disagreed, and felt that Diotrephes was arrogant, putting himself in a leadership role he didn't receive or deserve.
The Didache was written around the same time that 2 & 3 John was written. In it the author clearly sets down strict rules about these visiting missionaries:
Whenever an apostle comes to you, receive him as the Lord; but he shall not stay more than a single day, or if there be need, a second likewise; but if he stays three days, he is a false prophet. And when he leaves let the apostle receive nothing except bread, until he finds shelter; but if he asks for money, he is a false prophet (Didache 11:4-6).
There you have it; any more than 2 days, they are false prophets...and if they ask for money, they are false prophets.
When Jesus sent his disciples into villages, he gave them several instructions:
1. Preach the kingdom of God.
2. Heal the sick.
3. Take nothing but the basics.
4. Stay in one house only.
5. If you are not received, shake off your feet as a testimony against them.
When Luke said not to take any of the basics he broke it down to these:
1. A walking stick
2. A traveler's bag
3. Food
4. Money
5. A change of clothes
Jesus was giving commands to his disciples. This does not mean that he tells modern day missionaries and pastors to go out without anything.
GOING WITHOUT SUPPORT
There are missionaries who go into other countries without any support. Following this verse, they go out by faith, expecting to be cared for by God, as they win mulitiudes to Christ. Unfortunately, it usually doesn't work out like as these people hope. They become burdens on other missionaries who are supported by their home churches and organizations.
As one who served overseas for over 4 years, I can say that when people go out without financial and prayer support, they are almost always making a mistake. The apostle Paul always had a church or churches supporting him in fasting, prayer, finances, and by sending fellow missionaries. It seems that Paul believed that this verse was intended soley for the disciples that followed Jesus.
VISITING PEOPLE'S HOMES
Some early missionaries took different paths than Paul did. Paul had sending churches such as Antioch and Rome. Paul also had financial support from other churches and from working on his own. He never received money from the churches he was starting. On the other hand, there were missionaries who came after him who used different methods.
The new style missionaries had no sending churches that we know of...they also had no financial support. They went from Christian home to another, ministering in the communities.
It wasn't long before they began creating problems. Some missionaries discovered that there were homes that were very welcoming, and so the traveling missionary never left. These missionaries divided churches in the first and second centuries.
2 and 3 John addresses some of these people. John gave several rules:
1. If they don't preach Jesus Christ come in the flesh, don't receive them at all.
2. If they preach the incarnation, welcome them.
Diotrephes, a member of 3 John church, wanted nothing to do with any of these traveling missionaries, and threw out anyone who received them into their homes. John disagreed, and felt that Diotrephes was arrogant, putting himself in a leadership role he didn't receive or deserve.
The Didache was written around the same time that 2 & 3 John was written. In it the author clearly sets down strict rules about these visiting missionaries:
Whenever an apostle comes to you, receive him as the Lord; but he shall not stay more than a single day, or if there be need, a second likewise; but if he stays three days, he is a false prophet. And when he leaves let the apostle receive nothing except bread, until he finds shelter; but if he asks for money, he is a false prophet (Didache 11:4-6).
There you have it; any more than 2 days, they are false prophets...and if they ask for money, they are false prophets.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Life Concerns
The seeds that fell among the thorns represent those who hear the message, but all too quickly the message is crowded out by the cares and riches and pleasures of this life. And so they never grow into maturity (Luke 8:14).
There were different reasons people joined themselves to Jesus and there were different reasons they left following Jesus. One of the reasons that Jesus stated for the later was concern for this life. This concern was further subdivided into 3 distinct areas: general concerns for this life, pleasure, and money. These 3 are not evil in and of themselves, but are feelings that distract us from walking with God and seeking His kingdom.
Jesus told his disciples to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and then, these things would be added as well. But when people focus on life's concerns, pleasure and money; the spiritual things of God are choked out and left behind.
Jesus did not see the possibility of serving money and serving God at the same time. For him, it was one or the other.
There were different reasons people joined themselves to Jesus and there were different reasons they left following Jesus. One of the reasons that Jesus stated for the later was concern for this life. This concern was further subdivided into 3 distinct areas: general concerns for this life, pleasure, and money. These 3 are not evil in and of themselves, but are feelings that distract us from walking with God and seeking His kingdom.
Jesus told his disciples to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and then, these things would be added as well. But when people focus on life's concerns, pleasure and money; the spiritual things of God are choked out and left behind.
Jesus did not see the possibility of serving money and serving God at the same time. For him, it was one or the other.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Rich Women
And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance. (LK 8:3)
So far 2 types of rich people follow Jesus: Men who made honest money. When I say honest, I mean the money was considered socially approved. They earned the money fair and square due to a good spiritual life (religious leaders) or social position (rich young ruler). People who gained money through these methods felt comfortable enough with their money that when challenged by Jesus, they could not let it go.
The second group of wealthy were women and those who gained their income from socially unacceptable means, such as the tax-collectors. These people were far more receptive to Jesus' message of giving it all away.
Is it like this today?
So far 2 types of rich people follow Jesus: Men who made honest money. When I say honest, I mean the money was considered socially approved. They earned the money fair and square due to a good spiritual life (religious leaders) or social position (rich young ruler). People who gained money through these methods felt comfortable enough with their money that when challenged by Jesus, they could not let it go.
The second group of wealthy were women and those who gained their income from socially unacceptable means, such as the tax-collectors. These people were far more receptive to Jesus' message of giving it all away.
Is it like this today?
Monday, April 4, 2011
The Poor Heard the Gospel
Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached. (LK 7:22)
Jesus said this after John the Baptist sent to Jesus asking if he was the Christ. In the passage preceding there was mention of a widow whose son was raised by Jesus. Widows were usually the most destitute, the poorest of the poor as were beggers and those who were maimed or crippled. Jesus gave these people more than a sermon or future hopes. By healing them, he took away the most obvious obstacles to a decent life for them. Most if not all of these people would remain poor, but no longer among the lowest of the poor.
The passages after John's question tells us about rich people (Pharisees and Lawyers) who rejected noth Jesus' and John the Baptist's baptism.
Jesus said this after John the Baptist sent to Jesus asking if he was the Christ. In the passage preceding there was mention of a widow whose son was raised by Jesus. Widows were usually the most destitute, the poorest of the poor as were beggers and those who were maimed or crippled. Jesus gave these people more than a sermon or future hopes. By healing them, he took away the most obvious obstacles to a decent life for them. Most if not all of these people would remain poor, but no longer among the lowest of the poor.
The passages after John's question tells us about rich people (Pharisees and Lawyers) who rejected noth Jesus' and John the Baptist's baptism.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
The Centurion and Jesus
Centurions are always good people in the New Testament. They have incredible faith and are generous in giving to Israel. I would like to venture a guess that part of their job was to win the hearts of the local people. It would have been tough to do because the soldiers were the exact opposite and forced service upon and abused the locals. So to win the locals' hearts, Centurions gave and it worked more for them than for the army itself because the people liked the Centurions but did not like the soldiers.
In Luke 7 a Centurion sent Jewish leaders to Jesus to request healing for his sick servant. The Jewish leaders pled with Jesus on behalf of the Centurion telling Jesus that the Roman built a synagogue for them and therefore deserved this healing. The same kind of language was used in Acts with the Centurion who gave alms to the people of Israel.
Jesus started his journey to the Centurion's house, but the Centurion sent friends to Jesus, saying, "Lord, do not trouble Yourself, for I am not worthy that You should enter under my roof. Therefore I did not even think myself worthy to come to You. But say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I also am a man placed under authority, having soldiers under me. And I say to one, 'Go,' and he goes; and to another, 'Come,' and he comes; and to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."
Jesus was impressed by the Centurion's faith and healed the servant.
So what does this have to do with money? The Centurion had money and he used it to help others. We will see that in the book of Luke, the Centurion did what was needed for the rich to enter the kingdom of God. He gave generously and he had faith.
In Luke 7 a Centurion sent Jewish leaders to Jesus to request healing for his sick servant. The Jewish leaders pled with Jesus on behalf of the Centurion telling Jesus that the Roman built a synagogue for them and therefore deserved this healing. The same kind of language was used in Acts with the Centurion who gave alms to the people of Israel.
Jesus started his journey to the Centurion's house, but the Centurion sent friends to Jesus, saying, "Lord, do not trouble Yourself, for I am not worthy that You should enter under my roof. Therefore I did not even think myself worthy to come to You. But say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I also am a man placed under authority, having soldiers under me. And I say to one, 'Go,' and he goes; and to another, 'Come,' and he comes; and to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."
Jesus was impressed by the Centurion's faith and healed the servant.
So what does this have to do with money? The Centurion had money and he used it to help others. We will see that in the book of Luke, the Centurion did what was needed for the rich to enter the kingdom of God. He gave generously and he had faith.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Simon the Pharisee and the Sinner
Jesus was invited to eat at a Pharisee's house at the end of chapter 7 of Luke. While he was eating a woman (defined as a sinner) poured ointment on Jesus' feet, weeping and drying his feet with her hair. This offended the Pharisee, for in his thinking Jesus should have known what kind of woman this was who wept before him and knowing what kind of person she was. The pharisee thought that if Jesus was a prophet of any kind, he should have discerned what kind of woman this was and avoided contact with her.
There are some interesting notes to this story:
1. The woman felt welcomed by Jesus, enough to pour herself all over his feet.
2. The pharisee has the preconceived notion that prophets can always discern if people are evil or good.
3. Because Jesus welcomed the woman, the pharisee assumed that Jesus did not realize that the woman was a sinner.
4. The pharisee probably looked for the worst in Jesus.
5. Contrary to all appearences, Jesus did undrestand who this woman was.
6. How was the woman accepted into the pharisee's house? This is a mystery. Did Jesus bring her with him into the house? Did she come in uninvited?
7. Many think the lady was a prostitute, but there is no evidence to this in the Gospels. In fact, many suggest that the woman was in fact, Mary Magdalene because of the close parallel in the book of John.
I believe the term "sinners" was used to define anybody who did not fall into line with the religious leaders' groups. There were wealthy sinners such as tax-collectors and others who swindled money by illigitimate means, but on the whole sinners were poor people... the lower classes who knew very little about the Law of Moses and were highly uneducated.
Jesus told Simon the pharisee a parable about 2 people who owed money - one owed a lot more than the other. As both were forgiven of their debts, the one who was forgiven a large debt was far more appreciative than the other.
Jesus may have used money in the parable because he knew that so much of the pharisees' dislike of the sinner had to do with her poverty - the pharisee looked down on woman because she was poor.
There were generally 2 kinds of rich people in Jesus' day. There were those who obtained wealth in bad ways and there were those who obtained riches in good ways. Pharisees obtained wealth in good ways and therefored deemed their wealth as a blessing from God - a benefit of following Him. Poverty then was a sure sign of failure to walk with God. Poverty was a sign of sinfullness.
There are some interesting notes to this story:
1. The woman felt welcomed by Jesus, enough to pour herself all over his feet.
2. The pharisee has the preconceived notion that prophets can always discern if people are evil or good.
3. Because Jesus welcomed the woman, the pharisee assumed that Jesus did not realize that the woman was a sinner.
4. The pharisee probably looked for the worst in Jesus.
5. Contrary to all appearences, Jesus did undrestand who this woman was.
6. How was the woman accepted into the pharisee's house? This is a mystery. Did Jesus bring her with him into the house? Did she come in uninvited?
7. Many think the lady was a prostitute, but there is no evidence to this in the Gospels. In fact, many suggest that the woman was in fact, Mary Magdalene because of the close parallel in the book of John.
I believe the term "sinners" was used to define anybody who did not fall into line with the religious leaders' groups. There were wealthy sinners such as tax-collectors and others who swindled money by illigitimate means, but on the whole sinners were poor people... the lower classes who knew very little about the Law of Moses and were highly uneducated.
Jesus told Simon the pharisee a parable about 2 people who owed money - one owed a lot more than the other. As both were forgiven of their debts, the one who was forgiven a large debt was far more appreciative than the other.
Jesus may have used money in the parable because he knew that so much of the pharisees' dislike of the sinner had to do with her poverty - the pharisee looked down on woman because she was poor.
There were generally 2 kinds of rich people in Jesus' day. There were those who obtained wealth in bad ways and there were those who obtained riches in good ways. Pharisees obtained wealth in good ways and therefored deemed their wealth as a blessing from God - a benefit of following Him. Poverty then was a sure sign of failure to walk with God. Poverty was a sign of sinfullness.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Are We Really Suppose to Give That Much?
(Luke 6:38-42)
"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.
BACKGROUND
Soldiers could and would by law force people to carry their loads for certain distances. Most sources say the limit was one mile: a Roman mile would have been 1,000 paces (a pace was 2 steps) which is a bit shorter than a mile.
Throughout the OT an eye for an eye was the fair way of living in community. It was a matter of justice and keeping the communities and individuals within communities from escalating revenge.
In this passage Jesus told his listeners how they should respond to aggressive behavior from others who want to take a disciple's possessions. Rather than responding in the way they had been taught (an eye for an eye), Jesus told them to respond to aggressiveness with aggressive acceptance.
It is a command to act unfairly toward self in order to be generous to others. The acts Jesus calls for are acts that do not come naturally to most healthy people, they are acts of self destruction for the betterment of others whether or not others are fair in their requests or demands. Furthermore told his disciples to give - not only to people who aggressively demand from them by law or be force, but disciples were to give even to those who simply asked them for whatever they had. Such ability to give so freely could only come if the disciple completely disassociate themselves from what they owned.
It is very likely that most people in Jesus day would own no more than one cloak and one tunic. So to give both to somebody demanding or requesting such was to give away one of life's necessities. Furthermore to take someone's coat for more than a day was forbidden by the Law of Moses.
COMMENTS
When it came to giving to others, Jesus demanded that his followers actively "go the extra mile." Being unjustly and unlawfully sued for one of life's necessities, they were to give the aggressor even more. Rather than passively resisting a Roman soldier, his followers were to go 2 times what was required by them thus making themselves servants to those who oppressed them.
The reason behind this is debatable. Did Jesus want his disciples to give so generously in order to turn enemies into friends? Or was it something else? In Romans 12:19-21, Paul, who usually wrote little about the teachings of Jesus, wrote his commentary of the concept of going the extra mile.
Dear friends, never avenge yourselves. Leave that to God. For it is written,
"I will take vengeance;
I will repay those who deserve it,"
says the Lord.
Instead, do what the Scriptures say:
"If your enemies are hungry, feed them.
If they are thirsty, give them something to drink,
and they will be ashamed of what they have done to you." (literally - "you will heap burning coals on his head.")
Don't let evil get the best of you, but conquer evil by doing good.
Although some commentaries believe that heaping coals on one's head was culturally good, the context of Romans suggests that God's wrath would be worse for the aggressor if the victim repaid good for evil.
So why did Jesus tell his disciples to sacrifice life's necessities or to go the extra mile? The answer seems to be made clear in Luke 6:32-36 when Jesus said:
"Do you think you deserve credit merely for loving those who love you? Even the sinners do that! And if you do good only to those who do good to you, is that so wonderful? Even sinners do that much! And if you lend money only to those who can repay you, what good is that? Even sinners will lend to their own kind for a full return. "Love your enemies! Do good to them! Lend to them! And don't be concerned that they might not repay. Then your reward from heaven will be very great, and you will truly be acting as children of the Most High, for he is kind to the unthankful and to those who are wicked. You must be compassionate, just as your Father is compassionate.
Jesus told his disciples to give because God gives. They were to love their enemies because God loved their enemies and gave to them life and subsistence. They were to give so much because it set then apart from the unbelievers and reflected the nature of God. And they were to give to receive a reward in heaven. Matthew added one other reason to give...because God cares for all of his creation so how much more will he meet his disciples' needs.
Luke also tells us: "If you give, you will receive. Your gift will return to you in full measure, pressed down, shaken together to make room for more, and running over. Whatever measure you use in giving-large or small-it will be used to measure what is given back to you." (Luke 6:38)
On the surface it looks like Luke is saying that if we give away a lot of our possessions or money we will get back even more of the same. The only problem with this is...the context of this verse (IE: the verses right before it, and after) suggest that the giving is not monetary giving but giving in judgment or forgiving. If we give out judgement we will receive even more judgment; If we give out forgiveness (literally "letting go.") we will get forgiveness in return.
Jesus called his followers to go the extra mile and to love those who were deemed enemies, who oppressed and took from their very subsistence - their rulers and tax-collectors. Jesus would be saying, "If they want to take the shirt off your back, give them more and love them while you do it, because God does."
So the question is before us all. Does God want this of us? Or was this understood by people in Jesus day as an overstatement?
"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.
BACKGROUND
Soldiers could and would by law force people to carry their loads for certain distances. Most sources say the limit was one mile: a Roman mile would have been 1,000 paces (a pace was 2 steps) which is a bit shorter than a mile.
Throughout the OT an eye for an eye was the fair way of living in community. It was a matter of justice and keeping the communities and individuals within communities from escalating revenge.
In this passage Jesus told his listeners how they should respond to aggressive behavior from others who want to take a disciple's possessions. Rather than responding in the way they had been taught (an eye for an eye), Jesus told them to respond to aggressiveness with aggressive acceptance.
It is a command to act unfairly toward self in order to be generous to others. The acts Jesus calls for are acts that do not come naturally to most healthy people, they are acts of self destruction for the betterment of others whether or not others are fair in their requests or demands. Furthermore told his disciples to give - not only to people who aggressively demand from them by law or be force, but disciples were to give even to those who simply asked them for whatever they had. Such ability to give so freely could only come if the disciple completely disassociate themselves from what they owned.
It is very likely that most people in Jesus day would own no more than one cloak and one tunic. So to give both to somebody demanding or requesting such was to give away one of life's necessities. Furthermore to take someone's coat for more than a day was forbidden by the Law of Moses.
COMMENTS
When it came to giving to others, Jesus demanded that his followers actively "go the extra mile." Being unjustly and unlawfully sued for one of life's necessities, they were to give the aggressor even more. Rather than passively resisting a Roman soldier, his followers were to go 2 times what was required by them thus making themselves servants to those who oppressed them.
The reason behind this is debatable. Did Jesus want his disciples to give so generously in order to turn enemies into friends? Or was it something else? In Romans 12:19-21, Paul, who usually wrote little about the teachings of Jesus, wrote his commentary of the concept of going the extra mile.
Dear friends, never avenge yourselves. Leave that to God. For it is written,
"I will take vengeance;
I will repay those who deserve it,"
says the Lord.
Instead, do what the Scriptures say:
"If your enemies are hungry, feed them.
If they are thirsty, give them something to drink,
and they will be ashamed of what they have done to you." (literally - "you will heap burning coals on his head.")
Don't let evil get the best of you, but conquer evil by doing good.
Although some commentaries believe that heaping coals on one's head was culturally good, the context of Romans suggests that God's wrath would be worse for the aggressor if the victim repaid good for evil.
So why did Jesus tell his disciples to sacrifice life's necessities or to go the extra mile? The answer seems to be made clear in Luke 6:32-36 when Jesus said:
"Do you think you deserve credit merely for loving those who love you? Even the sinners do that! And if you do good only to those who do good to you, is that so wonderful? Even sinners do that much! And if you lend money only to those who can repay you, what good is that? Even sinners will lend to their own kind for a full return. "Love your enemies! Do good to them! Lend to them! And don't be concerned that they might not repay. Then your reward from heaven will be very great, and you will truly be acting as children of the Most High, for he is kind to the unthankful and to those who are wicked. You must be compassionate, just as your Father is compassionate.
Jesus told his disciples to give because God gives. They were to love their enemies because God loved their enemies and gave to them life and subsistence. They were to give so much because it set then apart from the unbelievers and reflected the nature of God. And they were to give to receive a reward in heaven. Matthew added one other reason to give...because God cares for all of his creation so how much more will he meet his disciples' needs.
Luke also tells us: "If you give, you will receive. Your gift will return to you in full measure, pressed down, shaken together to make room for more, and running over. Whatever measure you use in giving-large or small-it will be used to measure what is given back to you." (Luke 6:38)
On the surface it looks like Luke is saying that if we give away a lot of our possessions or money we will get back even more of the same. The only problem with this is...the context of this verse (IE: the verses right before it, and after) suggest that the giving is not monetary giving but giving in judgment or forgiving. If we give out judgement we will receive even more judgment; If we give out forgiveness (literally "letting go.") we will get forgiveness in return.
Jesus called his followers to go the extra mile and to love those who were deemed enemies, who oppressed and took from their very subsistence - their rulers and tax-collectors. Jesus would be saying, "If they want to take the shirt off your back, give them more and love them while you do it, because God does."
So the question is before us all. Does God want this of us? Or was this understood by people in Jesus day as an overstatement?
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Blessed Are the Poor
Then Jesus turned to his disciples and said, "God blesses you who are poor, for the Kingdom of God is given to you (Luke 6:20 NLT).
So who were the poor? Luke describes them as needy people who followed Jesus. They were people tormented by demons, lepers, the lame, people with withered hands, and people ruined by sin. They came to Jesus for healing, forgiveness and deliverence.
ECONOMIC SEPARATION
Injustice or God's Will by Steven J. Friesen (A People's History of Christianity, p.243)
According to Friesen the world of Jesus' day could be broken down into these catagories:
0.04% Imperial elites
1.00% Regional and provincial elites
1.76% Municipal elites
7.00%? Moderate surplus resources: some merchants, traders, freepersons, artisans and military veterans
22.0%? Stable near subsistence level (with reasonable hope of remaining abouve the minimum level to sustain life): many merchants and traders, regular wage earneres, artisans, large shop owners, freedpersons, some farm families.
40.0% At subsistence level and often below minimum level to sustain (especially those emplyed by others), wage earners, most merchants and traders, small shop/tavern owners.
28.0% Below subsistence level: some farm families, unattached widows, orphans, beggars, disabled people, unskilled day laborers, prisoners.
80% to 90% of people worked in agriculture and like some poorer 3rd world countries of today there was no middle class.
Here is what is important in all of this. The vast majority of the people that heard Jesus were poor.
So who were the poor? Luke describes them as needy people who followed Jesus. They were people tormented by demons, lepers, the lame, people with withered hands, and people ruined by sin. They came to Jesus for healing, forgiveness and deliverence.
ECONOMIC SEPARATION
Injustice or God's Will by Steven J. Friesen (A People's History of Christianity, p.243)
According to Friesen the world of Jesus' day could be broken down into these catagories:
0.04% Imperial elites
1.00% Regional and provincial elites
1.76% Municipal elites
7.00%? Moderate surplus resources: some merchants, traders, freepersons, artisans and military veterans
22.0%? Stable near subsistence level (with reasonable hope of remaining abouve the minimum level to sustain life): many merchants and traders, regular wage earneres, artisans, large shop owners, freedpersons, some farm families.
40.0% At subsistence level and often below minimum level to sustain (especially those emplyed by others), wage earners, most merchants and traders, small shop/tavern owners.
28.0% Below subsistence level: some farm families, unattached widows, orphans, beggars, disabled people, unskilled day laborers, prisoners.
80% to 90% of people worked in agriculture and like some poorer 3rd world countries of today there was no middle class.
Here is what is important in all of this. The vast majority of the people that heard Jesus were poor.
The Sermon on the Plain - The Setting
The people that came to Jesus came to be healed and to listen to him. Matthew said that the people liked to listen to Jesus because he taught them with authority. While the Religious leaders argued about minor details of the Law, Jesus preached boldly and decidedly what the Law taught...and the people liked that.
The Sermon on the Plain like the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) were framed like an Israelite covenant which leads some scholars to conclude that the sermon was a renewal of the covenant of Moses. More of that can be found in my blog about Politics and the New Testament.
More than the Sermon on the Mount, the Sermon on the Plain addressed class division. The Sermon on the Mount focused on the poor in spirit, the meek and the persecuted. The Sermon on the Plain focused on the poor, the hungry and the hated. Matthew is palatable to middle class of today that sees little connection between poverty and spirituality. Luke is offensive and virtually ignored by 21st Century Christians who live in the West, who although they may struggle from paycheck to paycheck, have enough to eat three meals a day and have enough to live in houses and accumulate things such as televisions, computers, pictures, nicknacks, and so forth.
To understand this better, let me design a chart.
BASIC NECESSITIES OF SURVIVAL which include food, clothing and shelter
CULTURAL NECESSITIES which may include a telephone, a car, cleaning materials, and work clothes.
SURPLUS which includes games, beer, and most of our possessions.
Somewhere around 90 - 95% of Jesus' audience struggled to obtain and to keep the basic necessities of survival. Most of who read this blog will never in this life struggle for the basic necessities of life. Our struggles will be in the surplus zone.
This is why we tend to ignore the Sermon on the Plain and focus on the Sermon on the Mount. The Sermon on the Mount addressed people who struggled with fitting in and had a hard time dealing with life in general. The Sermon on the Plain on the other hand addressed people who struggled with something we know little if anything about. They struggled for basic survival.
The Sermon on the Plain like the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) were framed like an Israelite covenant which leads some scholars to conclude that the sermon was a renewal of the covenant of Moses. More of that can be found in my blog about Politics and the New Testament.
More than the Sermon on the Mount, the Sermon on the Plain addressed class division. The Sermon on the Mount focused on the poor in spirit, the meek and the persecuted. The Sermon on the Plain focused on the poor, the hungry and the hated. Matthew is palatable to middle class of today that sees little connection between poverty and spirituality. Luke is offensive and virtually ignored by 21st Century Christians who live in the West, who although they may struggle from paycheck to paycheck, have enough to eat three meals a day and have enough to live in houses and accumulate things such as televisions, computers, pictures, nicknacks, and so forth.
To understand this better, let me design a chart.
BASIC NECESSITIES OF SURVIVAL which include food, clothing and shelter
CULTURAL NECESSITIES which may include a telephone, a car, cleaning materials, and work clothes.
SURPLUS which includes games, beer, and most of our possessions.
Somewhere around 90 - 95% of Jesus' audience struggled to obtain and to keep the basic necessities of survival. Most of who read this blog will never in this life struggle for the basic necessities of life. Our struggles will be in the surplus zone.
This is why we tend to ignore the Sermon on the Plain and focus on the Sermon on the Mount. The Sermon on the Mount addressed people who struggled with fitting in and had a hard time dealing with life in general. The Sermon on the Plain on the other hand addressed people who struggled with something we know little if anything about. They struggled for basic survival.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Forsaking All to Follow Jesus
In the fifth chapter of Luke, 5 people left everything they had to follow Jesus. The first 4 were fishermen (Peter, Andrew, James and John). The fifth was Matthew the tax collector.
I would like to note 2 things here:
1. There were no land owners who followed Jesus (none that we know of). Owning land made it harder to abandon all to follow someone. As far as I know, Barnabus was the only person in the Bible to sell everything to follow Jesus. Ananias and Saphira did as well but held back some of the money. Their hope was to become part of the inner circle of Christian leaders and for that they devised a scheme to sell their land and give a part of it to the Apostles and so win their honor as Barnabus did. Unfortuneatley, their scheme backfired.
2. There were 2 different types of rich people in the NT. Those who made honest money earned from a noble career and those who had collected wealth from socially hated work. The tax-collectors came from the second of these - their work was hated by the people.
Jesus called several to give up and follow, but out of the two types of rich people, only the socially hated rich (ie: the tax-collectors) could easily give up all. Those who could not give up their money for the kingdom of God were the rich young ruler and the religious leaders. These wealthy people got their money in socially acceptable ways.
I would like to note 2 things here:
1. There were no land owners who followed Jesus (none that we know of). Owning land made it harder to abandon all to follow someone. As far as I know, Barnabus was the only person in the Bible to sell everything to follow Jesus. Ananias and Saphira did as well but held back some of the money. Their hope was to become part of the inner circle of Christian leaders and for that they devised a scheme to sell their land and give a part of it to the Apostles and so win their honor as Barnabus did. Unfortuneatley, their scheme backfired.
2. There were 2 different types of rich people in the NT. Those who made honest money earned from a noble career and those who had collected wealth from socially hated work. The tax-collectors came from the second of these - their work was hated by the people.
Jesus called several to give up and follow, but out of the two types of rich people, only the socially hated rich (ie: the tax-collectors) could easily give up all. Those who could not give up their money for the kingdom of God were the rich young ruler and the religious leaders. These wealthy people got their money in socially acceptable ways.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
The Temptation (Lk 4)
The temptation of Jesus in the wilderness follows the temptations that Israel faced in their 40 year wandering in the wilderness. They were tempted with food (as Jesus was); they were tempted into testing the Lord (as Jesus was); and they were tempted with idolatry (as Jesus was).
In all three temptations, Israel failed their trials, but Jesus overcame.
In the first temptation Jesus was tempted to turn a rock into bread. Earlier John the Baptist told the common people to share the food they had with those who had none. Is there a connection? Only that bread was the staple of their life (and survival impulses would have the people horde bread and not give it away or not take advantage of an opportunity to use God's power to get it. We could say that in this 21st Century people are tempted to use God's power for money. It is a shame.
We in the 21st Century accumulate things - lots of stuff. They did not have anywhere near the amount of wealth we do and so food was far more coveted for them. Those who study the 1st Century have suggested that people in Jesus day may have had meat once a year because they could not afford it more than that. In all likelihood bread was the most common food for most people.
Then the Devil took him up and revealed to him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. The Devil told him, "I will give you the glory of these kingdoms and authority over them--because they are mine to give to anyone I please. I will give it all to you if you will bow down and worship me (Lk 4:5-7)."
Food, fame, power, and wealth - what more can someone want? The tempter offered Jesus the world (literally). These cravings are central to human nature, stemming from the need to survive. Because these cravings are so endemic to human nature they pose a strong temptation for anybody. None of these are bad in and of themselves, but people do bad things to acpuire and accumulate these, as the American writer Logan Pearsall Smith said: “Those who set out to serve both God and mammon soon discover that there is no God.”
In all three temptations, Israel failed their trials, but Jesus overcame.
In the first temptation Jesus was tempted to turn a rock into bread. Earlier John the Baptist told the common people to share the food they had with those who had none. Is there a connection? Only that bread was the staple of their life (and survival impulses would have the people horde bread and not give it away or not take advantage of an opportunity to use God's power to get it. We could say that in this 21st Century people are tempted to use God's power for money. It is a shame.
We in the 21st Century accumulate things - lots of stuff. They did not have anywhere near the amount of wealth we do and so food was far more coveted for them. Those who study the 1st Century have suggested that people in Jesus day may have had meat once a year because they could not afford it more than that. In all likelihood bread was the most common food for most people.
Then the Devil took him up and revealed to him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. The Devil told him, "I will give you the glory of these kingdoms and authority over them--because they are mine to give to anyone I please. I will give it all to you if you will bow down and worship me (Lk 4:5-7)."
Food, fame, power, and wealth - what more can someone want? The tempter offered Jesus the world (literally). These cravings are central to human nature, stemming from the need to survive. Because these cravings are so endemic to human nature they pose a strong temptation for anybody. None of these are bad in and of themselves, but people do bad things to acpuire and accumulate these, as the American writer Logan Pearsall Smith said: “Those who set out to serve both God and mammon soon discover that there is no God.”
Friday, January 7, 2011
The Message of John the Baptist (Lk 3)
John warned the people that a day of reckoning was coming. In response they asked John what they should do. His answer was that people needed to let go of the things and the wealth they sought after or had accumulated. 2/3 of what John told the people to do (in the book of Luke) addressed money or possessions.
He told the common people to share what they had with those who had less. He told tax collectors not to take more than what people owed and he told soldiers to be content with their pay.
There are two points to note: First of all, it is interesting to note that most of the people of the first century struggled to get by, and the vast majority had little more or less than the bare necessities of life and yet John wanted them to share what little they had with others who had less.
Secondly, as in other societies there were different world views between different groups. Soldiers would have looked down on the common people of the land (sometimes with discust), while the people hated the soldiers for being abusive, arrogant and forcing them to carry their baggage.
It was the same with the tax-collectors and the people being taxed. Tax-collectors were hard on the people because so many of the people cheated and refused to pay the right amount of taxes. They lied and hid what they could from the tax-collectors. But the people saw the tax-collectors as cruel and demanding. In both cases, with the soldiers and with the tax-collectors, John took the side of the people.
If John the Baptist were here today, I think he would not let people get easy baptisms. Before people could get baptised they would have to show signs that they have repented. He would tell us that if we had a savings, give half to those who had none. He would tell us to work ethically, not taking advantage of other people in business. He would tell us to be content with our wages and stop complaining about our work.
To put it all simply John tells us to put others' survival needs and prosperity equal to our own.
He told the common people to share what they had with those who had less. He told tax collectors not to take more than what people owed and he told soldiers to be content with their pay.
There are two points to note: First of all, it is interesting to note that most of the people of the first century struggled to get by, and the vast majority had little more or less than the bare necessities of life and yet John wanted them to share what little they had with others who had less.
Secondly, as in other societies there were different world views between different groups. Soldiers would have looked down on the common people of the land (sometimes with discust), while the people hated the soldiers for being abusive, arrogant and forcing them to carry their baggage.
It was the same with the tax-collectors and the people being taxed. Tax-collectors were hard on the people because so many of the people cheated and refused to pay the right amount of taxes. They lied and hid what they could from the tax-collectors. But the people saw the tax-collectors as cruel and demanding. In both cases, with the soldiers and with the tax-collectors, John took the side of the people.
If John the Baptist were here today, I think he would not let people get easy baptisms. Before people could get baptised they would have to show signs that they have repented. He would tell us that if we had a savings, give half to those who had none. He would tell us to work ethically, not taking advantage of other people in business. He would tell us to be content with our wages and stop complaining about our work.
To put it all simply John tells us to put others' survival needs and prosperity equal to our own.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Mary's and Zechariah's Celebration
1:51 His mighty arm does tremendous things!
How he scatters the proud and haughty ones!
1:52 He has taken princes from their thrones and exalted the lowly.
1:53 He has satisfied the hungry with good things and sent the rich away with empty hands.
Mary's confession here prepares us for Luke's view on finances. God will give good to the hungry but the rich will leave empty handed and God brings down the high and powerful and lifts up the lowly. Note: This does not say that God will prosper the hungry with money. In fact, what God is giving to the hungry is not stated.
1:74 We have been rescued from our enemies, so we can serve God without fear,....
Zechariah's prophecy which was given immediately after Mary's song, said nothing about the rich and the poor, the hungry or the full, but rather focused on God's work for Israel in destroying their political and military enemies so that Israel could serve God without hinderance from their enemies. This concern on military and the powerful was passed on to John the Baptist, however John the Baptist included money in his messages as well.
How he scatters the proud and haughty ones!
1:52 He has taken princes from their thrones and exalted the lowly.
1:53 He has satisfied the hungry with good things and sent the rich away with empty hands.
Mary's confession here prepares us for Luke's view on finances. God will give good to the hungry but the rich will leave empty handed and God brings down the high and powerful and lifts up the lowly. Note: This does not say that God will prosper the hungry with money. In fact, what God is giving to the hungry is not stated.
1:74 We have been rescued from our enemies, so we can serve God without fear,....
Zechariah's prophecy which was given immediately after Mary's song, said nothing about the rich and the poor, the hungry or the full, but rather focused on God's work for Israel in destroying their political and military enemies so that Israel could serve God without hinderance from their enemies. This concern on military and the powerful was passed on to John the Baptist, however John the Baptist included money in his messages as well.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Blessed Are Those Who Weep - Elizabeth's Story
God blesses you who weep now, for the time will come when you will laugh with joy (Lk 6:21 NLT).
Even though this blog is about money, those who are poor are akin to those who weep. Luke begins his adventure with Mary's cousin Elizabeth who was old and had no children. This was a common story in the bible beginning with Abraham's wife Sarah and Samuel's mother. It was a story of a wife who had no children which in ancient times carried with it much more shame than it does today. Women were expected to bear children for their husbands and if they didn't it was always considered the woman's fault. In our culture we look to the physical and to the scientific reasons for why a woman can or cannot give birth. We know that the husband's sperm count may be the reason. But the world that Jesus lived in looked at things in a whole different way.
A barron woman lived a life of tregedy and shame before her husband, his family and all of society. People wondered what she may have done to deserve such a curse, the husband was never at fault. Even though Elizabeth spent most of her life in such shame, the day finally came when she bore a child in her old age. This was a complete revearsal of fortune. Overnight her reputation in the surrounding area went from horrible to amazing. People no longer wodered what evil she may be hiding or how she deserved her misfortune. When she became pregnant people saw her as blessed by God and they knew that her child was going to be special.
Even though this blog is about money, those who are poor are akin to those who weep. Luke begins his adventure with Mary's cousin Elizabeth who was old and had no children. This was a common story in the bible beginning with Abraham's wife Sarah and Samuel's mother. It was a story of a wife who had no children which in ancient times carried with it much more shame than it does today. Women were expected to bear children for their husbands and if they didn't it was always considered the woman's fault. In our culture we look to the physical and to the scientific reasons for why a woman can or cannot give birth. We know that the husband's sperm count may be the reason. But the world that Jesus lived in looked at things in a whole different way.
A barron woman lived a life of tregedy and shame before her husband, his family and all of society. People wondered what she may have done to deserve such a curse, the husband was never at fault. Even though Elizabeth spent most of her life in such shame, the day finally came when she bore a child in her old age. This was a complete revearsal of fortune. Overnight her reputation in the surrounding area went from horrible to amazing. People no longer wodered what evil she may be hiding or how she deserved her misfortune. When she became pregnant people saw her as blessed by God and they knew that her child was going to be special.
Are Only the Poor Saved?
This is so radical, but Luke is built on the premise that the Kingdom of God has come and it belongs to the poor. Furthermore it does not belong to the rich for what they already have is all their ever going to get. To be sure the rich can get into the kingdom of God, but only with great difficulty and only with a costly price tag.
This is radical to most of us and doesn't sound right. But I assure you that what I say is exactly what Luke says throughout his writings as I will domonstrate.
This is radical to most of us and doesn't sound right. But I assure you that what I say is exactly what Luke says throughout his writings as I will domonstrate.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)