Psalm 1 and two ways to live

1 How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked,
Nor stand in the path of sinners,
Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!
² But his delight is in the law of the Lord,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
³ He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water,
Which yields its fruit in its season
And its leaf does not wither;
And in whatever he does, he prospers.

⁴ The wicked are not so,
But they are like chaff which the wind drives away.
⁵ Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
Nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
⁶ For the Lord knows the way of the righteous,
But the way of the wicked will perish. (NASB)

I've studied this Psalm both in biblical counseling but also in a course in OT wisdom literature, and it is one I often come back to when pondering my own sinfulness and wanting to reorient myself.

It's split in half, considering the role of the wicked. This might seem rather black and white to some, but to the Psalmist, life is about either following the law of the Lord (Torah) or not. Being bible based has a long history in both Jewish and Christian communities. All complexities of interpretation vanish from view here, it is about fundamental orientation in life.

The three-fold walk, stand, sit in verse one cautions us against pulling it apart too much, all of life is to be about avoiding bad advice and counsel and soaking ourselves in the bible (v2). Avoid wicked advice, sinful habits and scoffing at the righteous. Discernment in what is right and what is self-righteous and legalistic is important, and this will result from a daily, deep reflection on the law, prophets, gospels and epistles as we seek the whole counsel of God.

This Psalm is wisdom literature in that it tells us what should be, but isn't always. Meditating on the bible waters us like a tree in the desert, and we do not wither, but don't always prosper. Indeed to be watered by God is to be withered by the world at times. The perishing of the wicked shifts into the future; no blessing without judgement it seems. Yet grace abounds, be wary to call for someones perishing when God wants them to prosper.

When is good, good enough to speak

This post has been in my head for ages, in fact this kind of issue is always on my mind given I dare to speak in churches, at conferences and so on.

I posted this on my Facebook a while back. The response of a friend was to tell me (actually I knew by wasn't reflecting on the fact at the time) that MLK Jr had been an adulterer. It made me reflect upon a couple of passages I'd heard in sermons on 1 Peter. In particular chapter 4 (NASB)

¹⁵ Make sure that none of you suffers as a murderer, or thief, or evildoer, or a troublesome meddler; ¹⁶ but if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name. ¹⁷ For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? ¹⁸ And if it is with difficulty that the righteous is saved, what will become of the godless man and the sinner?

This also brings with it echoes of what Paul says in 1 Corinthians about being saved but through fire, with works not based on the gospel being burnt up.

It raises a few issues I'll briefly summarise.

1. How sinful is too sinful to be useful? For example, was MLK Jr's entire ministry undone to his adultery? More pointedly, what about you or my own sin? What disqualifies us from being of value, particularly in leadership roles?
2. Given we all sin and fall short of God's glory, and Paul says elsewhere (2 Cor 4:7) that the gospel is a treasure in a jay of clay, then obviously sinless perfectionism is not the goal before we speak or act (but is the goal)
3. Don't be paranoid, be assured of salvation and faithful. And be confident in your gifting by the Spirit.
4. Being tempted is not the same as falling, though thinking and doing are equated, doing is full blown sin
5. The tongue is particularly damaging (see much of James), so keeping a reign on that will avoid undercutting your ministry.

I think in particular we can't simply retreat into quietism and our own inner spiritual lives. I was once pulled up for having said something stupid (what's new say my friends) and then commenting on something I equated as empire. I was told 'empires come and go but you should ....'. But it can't be an either/or, but a both and. Keep my tongue in check and call out empire, for the gospel confronts all empires, from the ones I build in my own life to those of corporations and companies.

So back to the starting image. Although MLK Jr should have kept his own lusts in check, and adultery destroys lives, his comments on militarism and spiritual death are still true today with interventions, drones and spying on a countries own citizens as it was during the Vietnam warm with agent orange,  napalm and the very war itself.

So to my own thoughts, words and actions I tend. But do they silence my tongue in public? By no means!

Sanctification

After various discussions on 1 Peter 4:1-6 and how sanctification works, a friend shared this quote from Martin Luther which was too good not to pass on:

"This life, therefore, is not righteousness but growth in righteousness,

not health but healing,

not being but becoming,

not rest but exercise. 

We are not yet what we shall be, but we are growing toward it. 

The process is not finished, but is going on. 

This is not the end, but it is the road.

 All does not yet gleam in glory, but all is being purified."

in Defense and Explanation of all the Articles, Second Article 

Arming yourself in the Spirit - 1 Peter 4:1-6

1 Peter 4:1-6 Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same way of thinking, for whoever has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, ² so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God. ³ For the time that is past suffices for doing what the Gentiles want to do, living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry. ⁴ With respect to this they are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you; ⁵ but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. ⁶ For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does. ESV

Thinking about this passage it looks on the face of it that Christians are an awfully judgmental lot. Peter condemns the life of Gentiles as being debauched (a word not much in use these days). It is a lifestyle of extremes under display. That said, Australia is a culture not ignorant of binge drinking, alcoholism and associated violence. My own city of Melbourne has had big issues with glassings, etc following drinking. Note this isn't a judgment against the consumption of alcohol as such.

But to the point, Peter exhorts us to arm ourselves with the same thinking as Christ; be prepared to suffer for not following the deeds of others. A good look at Jesus shows a man who hung around with prostitutes but did not buy their services (today no doubt he'd surf the net without looking at porn), drunk wine but didn't end up vomiting in the street (I see dried vomit often near my work) or go belt someone up, and eat without pigging out excessively. Purity yes, self-righteousness or hyper spirituality no.

So to suffer for wanting not to do evil and to do good can be to cop flack for being a prude even when you are not, or to suffer your own temptations without giving into them. And how so? We can think strategically about how to avoid all sorts of sins, but if we ignore what Peter says in verse 6 about living in the Spirit, we will fall down. Thinking over the past week, there's much I could be seeking to be armed in the Spirit about instead of trying to muddle on purely by my own will or strategies. A Spirit enlivened will, reason and passions will go a long way to winning the battles we face.

Which empty?

¹⁸ For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit (NASB)

My reflection on this passage may at first seem a little tangential. It goes back to a conversation I had with someone some time ago. I was arguing that there was value in the crucifix, and not just the standard cross. Being of a Calvinist persuasion, this person wanted to avoid all hint of Catholicism and focus on the empty cross. 

There is of course good reason for this. Jesus said 'It is finished' (Jn 19:30). His atoning work, that act of taking the place of Israel and hence all of humanity on the cross, to atone for sin and 'bring us to God' is all achieved. So the symbolism of an empty cross is a body taken down because in the very act of being crucified Jesus bore the curse of sin (Gal 3:13).

But if this were the sole value of the cross - then there would be no rejoinders by Jesus (e.g. Mark 8:34) or Peter (1 Peter 2:24) to follow his example. I also take the encouragement by the writer to the Hebrews that Jesus was tempted in every way, including to revile his persecutors on the cross, but didn't. The crucifix reminds us of the suffering of Christ and his example. Those of us on the other side of the Reformation divide need to get over it.

Indeed, what about the empty tomb? The resurrection points to our future hope (1 Cor 15) and forgiveness of sins, to say nothing of Jesus as the world's true Lord (Rm 1:1-4). This is where all power and authority has been given to Jesus (Mt 28:18). Jesus doesn't simply rule the church, but the world - though this is not yet manifest and is a sacrificial ruling (unlike a good many pastors & priests in my experience).

So if we are to embrace the biblical symbols to identify the Christian community, both occupied and empty symbols are important in our reflection on Jesus, his work, our identity and mission.

Passion and warfare: reflections on 1 Peter 2:11

¹¹ Beloved, I urge you as aliens and exiles to abstain from the desires of the flesh that wage war against the soul. (NRSV)

I find this verse hard to move past. Mainly because it speaks to me quite deeply. We need to think carefully about what it does and doesn't mean, but the personal force of it is impossible to sidestep.

The warning is not to read this verse in a dualistic fashion. Here's how this might look

Beloved, I urge you as those in exile on earth, waiting to go to heaven, to abstain from the desires of the body that wage war against your eternal souls, bound for heaven.

The problem with flesh versus soul is that we immediately jump to physical versus spiritual. It doesn't help if you see exile in purely spiritual terms and not in social terms as Scott McKnight does - though there is no doubt we are exiles in a world where God's kingship is not clear to all. Here's another way of looking at it

Beloved, I urge you as outsiders in an ungodly world to abstain from the desires of the unregenerate part of your humanity that wage war against you.

So apart from the sociopolitical comments (see a couple of posts ago), it isn't about things of the body versus spiritual matters, but that part of us that isn't transformed versus who we are to be. To be sure, the word for flesh is used to describe our material bits at times, but the Greek word soma is used more for that than the word sarx (of form of which is used here). In other words, it isn't the body, the physical stuff which is somehow evil, but the desires unchecked, passions at war with our true identities. Soul is most often used in the Old Testament to mean the whole person. Sometimes in the New Testament, Paul will use soulish as opposite to spiritual, but we can't always use Paul to interpret Peter.

So given that is cleared up, it is clear that our desires can war against us. There is real struggle, real angst, real frustration and often a real sense of defeat. But of course we know in Christ that while the battle rages, the war has been won. 

We are called to abstain. Now abstinence is not a popular idea in today's world - probably a topic for another time. Think about voting. If you abstain, you refuse to vote. You refuse to countenance what is being raised. In abstaining, we refuse to give credence to fleshly desires, refuse to acknowledge their validity. We step outside of that world and not take part. 

This is easier said than done when so much of this is internal, within us and not merely without. This is why it is a spiritual thing - why we need the Holy Spirit to help us discipline ourselves, hence prayer, fasting(?), bible reading, etc. Once that battle has started, we are equipped for the external factors - changing friendships, web filters, whatever can act as an external aid to avoid temptations. I feel some reflections on the full armour of God coming on, but another time.

Subversive honour: reflections on 1 Peter 2:13-17

¹³ Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, ¹⁴ or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right. ¹⁵ For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. ¹⁶ Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God. ¹⁷ Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king. (NASB)

Hearing a sermon on this was kind of interesting. On the one hand, there was some excellent historical background on Nero, persecution, etc. And then there is, how the heck do we apply all of this??

The previous passage and my last post made it clear that in being Christian, one could end up doing things that were considered evil yet were really good deeds that could lead to people glorifying God. Included in this was not worshiping Caesar as divine, or any of the other Gods. This meant accusations of atheism and treason. It meant not holding offices, not serving in the army, hard to take part in the local economy, social exclusion, and so on. So clearly to be a Christian in that context was to be deeply subversive and counter cultural. Now that isn't simply a matter of dressing badly and calling each other bro.

Interestingly, Pliny as a governor was not punishing evildoers when trying people for being Christians (see his letter to Trajan and the response), not in the sense in which we'd understand evil. So is there a double play happening? Evil could be slander and not real evil in verse 12, and hence verse 14 could be ironic, whereas Peter says don't commit real evil in verse 16.

Note too that everyone is to receive honour in verse 17, but only God is to be feared or reverenced, i.e. worshiped as God. Yet Caesar demanded this too! So our honour is subversive, as I think it is in Romans 13. There is a real contrast between the kind of honour to be given to an oppressive regime and the community life in the body of Christ (Romans 12). Understand too that the language of body was also used by the Romans with Caesar at its head. Our head is Christ. We are a polis (city) on a hill, and therefore a new body politic.

Jesus made it clear that non-violence was deeply subversive of such authority while seeming to honour it. As both Walter Wink and Tom Wright have pointed out - being struck on the right cheek was done with a demeaning backhander. Turning the left said 'hit me again as an equal'. Taking a burden a second mile meant potentially getting the Roman soldier who could command such a task into trouble. You were being too helpful. Getting sued for your outer garment and then handing them your undergarment too and walking out of court naked was an outrageous thing to do. Maybe hyperbola, pointing to a way of thinking. Resist, but do so honourably and non-violently.

So given all of this, how do we honour so much that is ungodly (yet thank God not yet violent as in other parts of the world) while subverting it? How do we honour our politicians if we despise their policies? Be patriotic while not being nationalistic? Love our footy team without being fanatical? Buy and sell goods while not being materialistic or contribute overly to a system destructive of lives and creation? 

One thing I think we should avoid in this country is the kind of anti-government paranoia seen in other places like the US. Governments do good things, even if often badly. Certainly the system is broken and we don't look to better government for salvation; but a working democracy is the best of bad systems. It just seems to me that there isn't a lot of good really in view here in 1 Peter.

So then, I think that our rhetoric and our behaviour must be honouring and affirming yet critical where need be. Pulpits can be respectful while prophetic. Respectful disagreement must mark us out - sometimes vocal and sometimes passively in our workplaces, in the public sphere, in our relationships. Whether we are really free or under some real compulsion (one can have a bad boss but not actually be a slave), we are to honour all, even self-deluded leaders. Love of the agape kind is for our brothers and sisters who are part of the City on a Hill (not just the church of the name but all believers), and fear is only to be of God.

Ok, so the quick tips:

1. If you end up having to do something above and beyond the call of duty at work, or are being taken advantage of in a relationship, you might want to say so in not so many words, and let them know as a Christian you are doing this.
2. You have to pay taxes, even if they go to somethings you don't agree with. For example, overseas aid money is being diverted to offshore processing. I find this abhorrent myself, so I pay my taxes but join various forms of protest about this.
3. When you are being punished as an evildoer simply for being a Christian, you may have opportunity to protest. Take it, but do so honourably. Paul is a good example of this during his persecution which eventually led him to Rome (and probably release the first time). If a colleague has a complaint, you still need to honour them while trying to resolve the issue.

You get the idea. Expect problems. Don't welcome them for themselves, or bring them upon yourself for genuine sins. But when they come for being faithful, in an odd sort of way it's a comforting thing.