In Daniel, Chapter 3, the three friends of Daniel find themselves having to make a very grave decision. Would they bow down to the idol that Nebuchadnezzar had set up, as was expected, or would they obey the commandment of God that said worship must be given to none other than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Their lives depended upon the answer. If they refused to kneel, a furnace awaited them.
They needed no time. They knew the answer. “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego . . . said to the king, ‘O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If this be so [that is, that they would end up in the oven for their decision], our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.’”
How often have we seen faith falter at just this moment? A crisis arises, God is sought for deliverance, and when it does not go as hoped, he is abandoned as one to be scorned for emotional deafness and another, more attentive, god is embraced. Such idolizing was not an option for these young men. God, and God alone, would be worshiped even if his will included a horrifying death.
This is faith -- biblical faith. It is a belief that God is to be worshiped and trusted as God despite how the matter turns out. God could certainly protect them, if he wished, and they would emerge from the oven, or be prevented from entering it in the first place. But, if in the wisdom of God, they were to perish at the hands of this blustering tyrant, they would not give to another what was due God. Theirs was not a performance-based faith. It was not dependent upon God doing what they wished. Rather, it was a respectful resolve to worship a God that does as he wishes. This is the stuff of martyrs. May God find in us such adoration for his person and purposes.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Thursday, February 5, 2009
I Pledge Allegiance?
“Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Mark 12:17
Those who wield political power have a just claim upon our lives and energies. They serve as God’s agents in the world, exercising his authority. We are instructed, therefore, to pay taxes in their support and to show them honor (Romans 13:6-7). Praying for them, we lighten their load, and this has the benefit of bringing blessing into our own lives (1 Timothy 2:2). Those in authority have every right to expect from us willing and diligent service in support of maintaining an ordered and just society. We must not, then, resist their rule but accept it as a manifestation of God in the world. This is rendering to Caesar the things that are his.
However, as C. S. Lewis observes, “He who surrenders himself without reservation to the temporal claims of a nation, or a party, or a class is rendering to Caesar that which, of all things, most emphatically belongs to God: himself” (Learning in a Time of War). When we do not maintain an inner loyalty to God we fall prey to seducing patriotism, tradition, social status, or some other of the many worldly values that seek to rule us.
The ability of Daniel and his friends to prosper while in exile was because they seemed to understand what Jesus was talking about. They would give to Nebuchadnezzar what he had a right to expect, but they would not allow him to possess their souls. Throughout their captivity, they remain “inner strangers to the life and culture in which they are outwardly and fully involved” (Ronald Wallace, Daniel, p. 39).
Here is a model for us. We, too, feel the loss of the familiar as we sojourn in what seems to be an increasingly foreign land. Yet, as did the young men of the exile, we can learn the language and wisdom of those around us without forsaking our allegiance to the One who has placed us here.
Those who wield political power have a just claim upon our lives and energies. They serve as God’s agents in the world, exercising his authority. We are instructed, therefore, to pay taxes in their support and to show them honor (Romans 13:6-7). Praying for them, we lighten their load, and this has the benefit of bringing blessing into our own lives (1 Timothy 2:2). Those in authority have every right to expect from us willing and diligent service in support of maintaining an ordered and just society. We must not, then, resist their rule but accept it as a manifestation of God in the world. This is rendering to Caesar the things that are his.
However, as C. S. Lewis observes, “He who surrenders himself without reservation to the temporal claims of a nation, or a party, or a class is rendering to Caesar that which, of all things, most emphatically belongs to God: himself” (Learning in a Time of War). When we do not maintain an inner loyalty to God we fall prey to seducing patriotism, tradition, social status, or some other of the many worldly values that seek to rule us.
The ability of Daniel and his friends to prosper while in exile was because they seemed to understand what Jesus was talking about. They would give to Nebuchadnezzar what he had a right to expect, but they would not allow him to possess their souls. Throughout their captivity, they remain “inner strangers to the life and culture in which they are outwardly and fully involved” (Ronald Wallace, Daniel, p. 39).
Here is a model for us. We, too, feel the loss of the familiar as we sojourn in what seems to be an increasingly foreign land. Yet, as did the young men of the exile, we can learn the language and wisdom of those around us without forsaking our allegiance to the One who has placed us here.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
The Intent of History
“Now these things took place as examples for us . . .” 1 Corinthians 10: 6
History has meaning. This is because it has intent: “these things took place as examples . . . ” So we study history with an eye to learning what happened, why it happened, and to what end it happened. That last component would not seem to be part of the secular historians task, but biblically, it is the whole of it: “For of him and through him and to him are all things” (Romans 11:36).
History as captured by the Bible carries a particular burden: it is rarely, if ever, a sterile, objective, dispassionate, recounting of events. Each account saved for us is intended to illustrate what is called the history of redemption: the unfolding fulfillment of the promise made to fallen man in the Garden of Eden, namely, that at the end of history what is meant to be accomplished, will be accomplished, and it will be for good. This biblical recounting of history, which ultimately involves the entire world, is focused on father Abraham and his descendants, for it was decreed that through him a particular man would come who will be shown to be both the catalyst of the story and the culmination of the story -- the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.
In the mercy of God, we who have been born of God are drawn into this particular story. We are not bystanders, looking from the outside, but participants in God’s redemptive history (Ephesians 2:19), both as beneficiaries and as those who proclaim that history (2 Corinthians 5:20). Additionally, such stories are meant to provoke us to be faithful followers of the Lord of history (Cf. Hebrews 12:1-2).
But even though the story preserved for us in the Bible has particular intent, what is before us remains real history. These are events, while part of the greater work of redemption, that are nevertheless particular to the context and personages involved. We must resist, therefore, making it formulaic. By that I mean, that because something happened in a certain way at one point in biblical history, or because a certain person undertook a particular action, a faithful follower of Jesus should expect to see and do likewise. I am not suggesting any kind of relativism in our extracting meaning from the biblical account, but rather a respectful approach to what is before us that honors the context of what transpired, and looks to understand from that God-directed history what might be understood about our own God-directed history. The God, who ruled with sovereignty over history then, still rules over history today.
History has meaning. This is because it has intent: “these things took place as examples . . . ” So we study history with an eye to learning what happened, why it happened, and to what end it happened. That last component would not seem to be part of the secular historians task, but biblically, it is the whole of it: “For of him and through him and to him are all things” (Romans 11:36).
History as captured by the Bible carries a particular burden: it is rarely, if ever, a sterile, objective, dispassionate, recounting of events. Each account saved for us is intended to illustrate what is called the history of redemption: the unfolding fulfillment of the promise made to fallen man in the Garden of Eden, namely, that at the end of history what is meant to be accomplished, will be accomplished, and it will be for good. This biblical recounting of history, which ultimately involves the entire world, is focused on father Abraham and his descendants, for it was decreed that through him a particular man would come who will be shown to be both the catalyst of the story and the culmination of the story -- the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.
In the mercy of God, we who have been born of God are drawn into this particular story. We are not bystanders, looking from the outside, but participants in God’s redemptive history (Ephesians 2:19), both as beneficiaries and as those who proclaim that history (2 Corinthians 5:20). Additionally, such stories are meant to provoke us to be faithful followers of the Lord of history (Cf. Hebrews 12:1-2).
But even though the story preserved for us in the Bible has particular intent, what is before us remains real history. These are events, while part of the greater work of redemption, that are nevertheless particular to the context and personages involved. We must resist, therefore, making it formulaic. By that I mean, that because something happened in a certain way at one point in biblical history, or because a certain person undertook a particular action, a faithful follower of Jesus should expect to see and do likewise. I am not suggesting any kind of relativism in our extracting meaning from the biblical account, but rather a respectful approach to what is before us that honors the context of what transpired, and looks to understand from that God-directed history what might be understood about our own God-directed history. The God, who ruled with sovereignty over history then, still rules over history today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
