.jpeg)
The bulk of Malachi’s prophecy consists of the prophet quoting God directly, passing on corrective messages from YHWH to his nation and its priests. Verses 10-17 of chapter 2 are the first time the prophet has had anything to say for himself, slipping into the first person plural (“we”, “us”). Also, until this point Malachi has exclusively targeted the priests. Now he rebukes the men of his entire nation.
His primary concern remains the profaning of covenants.
In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.
Continuing a discussion arising out of Immanuel Can’s recent and well-received post “Who’s Minding the Store?”
Elders have the job of feeding the flock. IC’s post suggested that not only the Holy Spirit’s leading but a certain amount of human organization, ingenuity and especially careful observation are necessary in effectively carrying out that task. I pointed out some of the things that make that tougher than it looks, and we considered three of them last week. And here we are.
Tom: Since you mention individual gifts, IC, I pointed out in our discussion last Friday that our gifts tend to predispose us to see the world a certain way.
Here’s a simple thought.
But it will be the least simple of my simple thoughts, by far.
The triune God is not just far superior to any of the polytheists’ gods, but also to any monolithic type of god. It is better that we serve one God in three Persons than that we claim God is a big singularity.
At first glance, you might not think so. You might think it’s easier and better to have to explain a God that’s just a big ‘One’ than to have to unravel what it means to say God is triune. You might think, for example, that Muslims and monotheist Jews and even Hindus have an easier job talking about God than Christians do.
Moreover, many Christians have a very difficult time explaining what one-in-three really means, in application to God.
Check that: every Christian does.
Some people think having favorite verses is a bit like having favorite children: it’s just not done. Those who think this way either have yet to produce large families or else are not big on self-awareness. At any given moment, every parent has a favorite child, even if their favor is a moving target and its object a different child every day of the week. The trick is not to let one’s affections direct one’s behavior as Jacob did, very much to Joseph’s detriment.
It’s hardly surprising that my favorite verses come from my favorite book, Hebrews. I’m not the least bit Hebrew myself, but few books of the Bible glorify Christ so explicitly and magnificently, even if this one was primarily targeted at a Jewish audience.
Growing up, no matter how good or bad the sermon, the speaker’s closing comments were usually the last I would ever hear of it. A man would undertake to preach the Word on behalf of its Author. An hour later, the residue had trickled down into the occasional ear, or become the subject of animated discussion at a few lunch or dinner tables. If I wanted to revisit what he had said, I had to reconstruct it from memory. Most of the time, I had forgotten the substance of any given message by the middle of the next week, though a memorable one-liner might stick with me for a while.
Much like the last 2,000 years or so, I imagine, though members of the early church were arguably more attentive than modern audiences. Without Bibles to consult, perhaps they had to be.
.jpg)
“What does it mean that there is ‘one baptism’?”
I can see how this expression might confuse a new Christian. Technically, there is not “one baptism” in scripture; there are many. I read somewhere once that there are seven.
That would be a neat thing ... if true.
In fact, let’s count and see.
Few Greek words in the New Testament have given translation teams as many fits as the one used by the Lord Jesus in Matthew 19 to describe our world’s future:
“Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’ ”
That’s the ESV. The NIV calls it “the renewal of all things”. The New Living translators went with “when the world is made new”. The KJV, among numerous others, calls it “the regeneration”. Holman goes with “the Messianic Age”, which is interpretation, not translation (though I think he is correct). The CEV says, “in the future world”. The Good News Translation calls it the “new age”, and GOD’S WORD® (how did they ever get that trademark registered?) calls it “the world to come”. The ISV calls it “the renewed creation” and Weymouth goes with “New Creation”.
Talk about variety! But you get the idea, I’m sure.
.jpg)
There is no way to overstate the danger to Israel posed by the ongoing corruption of their religious leaders in the early fifth century BC. Judah had only recently returned from seventy years of Babylonian captivity intended to correct their idolatry. As far as obvious, literal idol worship was concerned, the exile cured Israel for good. However, the hearts of most of the priests were no more open toward God than the previous generations, and their sinfulness quickly began to manifest in new and offensive ways, the first of which we studied last week.
Malachi’s five complaints show how speedily corrupt spiritual leaders can wreck a nation. God assured the priests he would deal with them. It was only a matter of time.
In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.
In his recent post “Who’s Minding the Store?” Immanuel Can considered the responsibility of elders in deciding what should be taught in the local church they care for. His point was that elders need to really know their congregations in order to provide them with the spiritual food they need. Somebody needs to “mind the store”, so to speak.
Tom: I wanted to get into this a bit further with you, IC, and it seems to me this is a better place to do it than a back-and-forth in the comments to the original post.
“The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation,” Thoreau famously wrote.
I hate to say it, but a great number of modern Christians could be described in just that way. Their lives are quietly unhappy — unhappy to the point of deep frustration, and even depression. Having been told that the Christian life should be abundant, joyful, meaningful and overflowing with freedom, they find themselves living in a way that is dull, tired, seemingly pointless, and characterized — when they stop to characterize it at all — by a bunch of have to’s.
In 2008, author John Kloppenborg released the full text of a
“reconstruction” of the
Naturally, it had to be “different”. Nobody was going to be interested in a book affirming the existing gospel accounts in every respect.
Jonathan Noyes at Stand to Reason has an interesting post up this week on the subject of three kinds of doubt Christians may experience.
There is intellectual doubt: questioning the historicity of the Bible, the rationality of Christianity, and so on. There is emotional doubt, where pain, disappointment or unanswered prayers lead believers to question the goodness or existence of God. Then there is moral doubt, fueled by a failing struggle with sin. It can lead us to doubt the ability of God’s grace to transform us, and may result in inertia and despair.
It’s a worthwhile exploration of the subject, but I’d like to add one more kind of doubt to Jonathan’s list: theological doubt.
.jpg)
“Is it important to know Greek and Hebrew when studying the Bible?”
My father used to caution us to beware of “little Greeks”. Seminary students know a little Greek in about the same way I know “a little French” because I studied it for five years in high school. If I went to Quebec today, I wouldn’t dare utter a word of it. Around any genuine expert, my paucity of actual language knowledge would be laughable.
“Then Isaac trembled very violently.”
If Isaac had gotten his way, Esau would have become a great nation. Jacob’s offspring would have served his elder brother’s children. Maybe Hamas would be targeting Edomites today instead of Israelis.
If Isaac had gotten his way, God would have undeservedly blessed a son who despised his own birthright, and back-burnered the son who valued it.
.jpg)
The Lord’s table is a sufficiently important subject that I’ve felt the need to touch on it recently outside this series. Today’s post is probably more effective if you read it in connection with that one.
Our reading in Malachi is the first of five complaints made by the Lord against his people approximately a century after they were allowed to return to their historic homeland by a Persian monarch with respect for Israel’s God. Sadly, all that God had done on their behalf didn’t keep Judah and Israel from going astray in a variety of new ways.
In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.
Writer Andrew Sullivan gives this advice to churches:
“If the churches came to understand that the greatest threat to faith today is not hedonism but distraction, perhaps they might begin to appeal anew to a frazzled digital generation. Christian leaders seem to think that they need more distraction to counter the distraction. Their services have degenerated into emotional spasms, their spaces drowned with light and noise and locked shut throughout the day, when their darkness and silence might actually draw those whose minds and souls have grown web-weary.”
Tom: “The greatest threat to faith today is not hedonism but distraction.” What do you think, IC? Is technology dangerous to Christians?
I was listening to a preacher a few days ago … just online, you know. And he said something that’s stayed with me and keeps running around in my head, because it’s just so smart. It’s something that solves a perplexity for me that I have to confess I’ve struggled with for years. I want to pass it on to you.
My perplexity has been this: When do you just say what the Bible says, and when do you hold back?
The preacher said this: “I’m through protecting people from scripture.”
Life changes us. Some people get better, some get worse, but nobody remains unchanged. At least, that’s the conclusion I’m coming to. Either my memory is failing me — a possibility I won’t completely discount — or my old friends and acquaintances are different people than they were in their teens, twenties and thirties. Time and circumstances have either refined or greatly eroded their characters, depending on how they responded to what life has served up.
That can be a scary thing to witness up close.
“While people are saying, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.”
The day of the Lord will catch the world by surprise. I used to find this strange. I don’t anymore.
The vast majority of human beings are instinctively uniformitarian in their outlook. They don’t read history, and even if they do, they don’t imagine the sort of catastrophes that occurred in other times and places could possibly happen during their lifetimes, let alone a once-in-human-history event like the day of the Lord. In one of the earliest books of the New Testament, Paul writes that the day of the Lord will come like a thief. In one of the last books, Peter says exactly the same thing. Few on earth will see it coming.
.jpg)
“Why does God test us?”
Regardless of your personal beliefs about the origin of man, it’s evident bad things happen to good people. The difference between a Christian worldview and a naturalistic one is that the latter offers no explanation for suffering and unpleasant choices beyond the luck of the draw. If randomness rules, then these serve no higher purpose than weeding out the weak. If God does, then perhaps misery has meaning.
I could offer all kinds of anecdotes and speculations in response to a question like this, but it’s one that scripture answers in plain language very early on. Who needs my opinion when we can read the words of the Holy Spirit through men like Moses and Job?