I'm reading through Esther these days, and I'm reminded of what I'd thought a few years back, that there is quite likely sadness inside her story, or rather the rest of her story. We romanticize the story, the beauty pageant winner who comes away with the grand prize of queenship. And then the drama of Haman's plot and her counterplot to save the Jews from death.
But what was the rest of her life like? How satisfying was her marriage? The social system enabled her husband to indulge any whim he ever had for all the other attractive women surrounding him. Any time she failed to fascinate, he could restage another pageant and enthrone a new charming faced winner. What kind of marriage was it really when she still faced death any time she wanted to come to him and he didn't want to talk? Twenty, thirty years later, did she view her marriage as a Cinderella romance, or as being trapped in a gilded cage?
Did she have children? None are recorded. If she had, the system surely forbade her to have much of a role raising them. They certainly weren't given a Jewish upbringing. A daughter, raised to be another harem beauty? A son, raised to enjoy harem beauties?
What was her life like when she was sixty? Queen Mother, ritually honored but effectively ignored? Could she still manage to believe she was born for such a time as that? By God's grace she could have, she could well have been sustained by the astonishing goodness of peace and joy despite circumstances. But it would not have been easy.
But perhaps in outward loneliness, she learned and experienced the great truth that God is with us, and comforts us in any affliction. Maybe in heaven she was rewarded for more than saving the people from Haman.
Gospel core values
What is the core of the Gospel? That God shows mercy on unworthy people, forgives them, adopts them as his own and makes them his people.
So what should I believe about this personally?
So what should I believe about this personally?
- I can believe that by God's grace I have been chosen, imperfect as I am, to a significant role in God's Kingdom. He has chosen me, knowing my imperfections and takes upon himself the task of qualifying me for this. I will pursue this calling in relationship to God, opening my heart and laying bare my soul with its imperfections to him, because he knows about them already, and has chosen me anyway. I have seen that his grace in my life is bigger than my shortcomings. I can lay my longings and frustrations, both good or evil, before him, and experience his peace, even when in my life the good longings are not yet met and the evil longings have not yet gone away. I will continue in this faith I have learned, to walk in emotional honesty with God and trust his peace in my difficulties. The peace of pleasant circumstances is good when it happens but cannot be relied upon.
- This same grace and calling I rejoice in is also given to my brothers and sisters. So I will not disbelieve in their calling when I perceive them as imperfect, but seek to understand their hearts, consider that I as well as they might be imperfect in the issue at hand, and pray for them that God helps them in their weaknesses.
The law of sequels: two exceptions
Everyone says that sequels are never as good as the original. I agree that the generalization holds up pretty well. Two exceptions do come to mind.
1) The Lord of the Rings books. These were written as a sequel to the Hobbit. And they are better. The Hobbit is good, but the LOTR books are better.
2) The New Testament. Perhaps strictly speaking we shouldn't call it a sequel, since both the Old and New Testaments are actually anthologies of various books. But there is a sequel-like effect in the books that describe Jesus Christ and the New Covenant, a retelling and recasting of the story of God and his chosen people, Abraham and his descendants.
As a sequel, it attains something quite remarkable. In one sense it is a better story, but it also renews my curiosity to go back and read the original story as well.
1) The Lord of the Rings books. These were written as a sequel to the Hobbit. And they are better. The Hobbit is good, but the LOTR books are better.
2) The New Testament. Perhaps strictly speaking we shouldn't call it a sequel, since both the Old and New Testaments are actually anthologies of various books. But there is a sequel-like effect in the books that describe Jesus Christ and the New Covenant, a retelling and recasting of the story of God and his chosen people, Abraham and his descendants.
As a sequel, it attains something quite remarkable. In one sense it is a better story, but it also renews my curiosity to go back and read the original story as well.
Prayer for policy makers
Breathe your life, O brooding enlivening Spirit, into the dry bones of legal requirements and lists of procedures. Use their work to make our places alive, with the gleamingly fresh green of new buds sprouting joy and hope. But not all life comes from policy. Give them wisdom to know what problems their work cannot solve.
Honoring God
I've heard more than once the ideal that we should "Honor God in all we do or say." I suspect this has become a cliché. When I hear it, I wonder how much it really encourages us to be aware of God's love and truth, or if it is just a platitude we say knowing no one can argue with it.
I also wonder if it isn't a dangerous oversimplification. What comes to mind when I hear it is an idea that isn't Scriptural. It gives me the image of God defining a standard of behavior for us, then expecting us to keep the standard. But that isn't the Gospel. The Gospel says God knows we cannot live up to his standard, but he has provided a solution for us in Jesus Christ.
I would say a better statement would be "In all areas of life, honor God for what He has said and done. We honor God by believing Him when He tells us we fall short of His standards, and believing Him when He freely offers mercy and help to us in our shortcomings. Committing ourselves to admitting where we fall short and seeking God's help to best approach His standards in all areas of our lives."
I also wonder if it isn't a dangerous oversimplification. What comes to mind when I hear it is an idea that isn't Scriptural. It gives me the image of God defining a standard of behavior for us, then expecting us to keep the standard. But that isn't the Gospel. The Gospel says God knows we cannot live up to his standard, but he has provided a solution for us in Jesus Christ.
I would say a better statement would be "In all areas of life, honor God for what He has said and done. We honor God by believing Him when He tells us we fall short of His standards, and believing Him when He freely offers mercy and help to us in our shortcomings. Committing ourselves to admitting where we fall short and seeking God's help to best approach His standards in all areas of our lives."
What is new about the New Covenant?
The first two thoughts that come to my mind are these:
1) Jesus died once for all for sins, there is no longer a need for an atoning sacrifice every year.
2) The new covenant is also open to Gentiles, not just the nation of Israel.
But I think there has to be more. When Jeremiah writes about the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) he says it will be different than the old one. What was wrong with the old one? The people didn't keep it. "They broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them (v 32)"
So God says he will make a new covenant. He will put his law in our minds and write it on our hearts. He will make us into people that will keep his covenant.
God could have written off the people that didn't keep the first covenant. "Its not my fault," he could say. "Didn't I say 'do this and you will live?'"
But God didn't write off his people, he rewrites the covenant.
(When he opened the new covenant to Gentiles as well as Jews, he didn't write off the Jews. The New Testament talks about Gentiles being included with Israel, it doesn't talk about Gentiles replacing Israel).
1) Jesus died once for all for sins, there is no longer a need for an atoning sacrifice every year.
2) The new covenant is also open to Gentiles, not just the nation of Israel.
But I think there has to be more. When Jeremiah writes about the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) he says it will be different than the old one. What was wrong with the old one? The people didn't keep it. "They broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them (v 32)"
So God says he will make a new covenant. He will put his law in our minds and write it on our hearts. He will make us into people that will keep his covenant.
God could have written off the people that didn't keep the first covenant. "Its not my fault," he could say. "Didn't I say 'do this and you will live?'"
But God didn't write off his people, he rewrites the covenant.
(When he opened the new covenant to Gentiles as well as Jews, he didn't write off the Jews. The New Testament talks about Gentiles being included with Israel, it doesn't talk about Gentiles replacing Israel).
Grace, law and change
At the Gospel Coalition blogs, (well worth looking at), there was a post last week about the Gospel, the Law and (I think) how to change.
The writer Tullian Tchividian said some things that resonate with me. Here are a couple:
Brother Tullian says that the law, the standard of God's behavior, is important for Christians. We must not think though, that it gives us the power to do what it requires.
But what do I do when I see in my life things that don't match God's standard? Do I make rules for myself to change? No, I think that would be thinking the standard itself has the power to change me, or that I, myself, have the power to change. I need to seek God to change.
I think this comes back to my Faith and Circumstances theme. God has made many promises, including the ones that I will be changed. I can look at my life and circumstances, and conclude the promises can't be true. Or I can look at my circumstances, including the changes I still haven't made, and say "God, prove yourself in me, here and now. I need You."
The writer Tullian Tchividian said some things that resonate with me. Here are a couple:
Long-term, sustained obedience can only come from the grace which flows from what Jesus has already done, not guilt or fear of what we must do.
Don't American [Christians] need to be shaken out of their comfort zones? Yes—but you don’t do it by giving them law; you do it, as Dane points out, by giving them gospel.
Brother Tullian says that the law, the standard of God's behavior, is important for Christians. We must not think though, that it gives us the power to do what it requires.
But what do I do when I see in my life things that don't match God's standard? Do I make rules for myself to change? No, I think that would be thinking the standard itself has the power to change me, or that I, myself, have the power to change. I need to seek God to change.
I think this comes back to my Faith and Circumstances theme. God has made many promises, including the ones that I will be changed. I can look at my life and circumstances, and conclude the promises can't be true. Or I can look at my circumstances, including the changes I still haven't made, and say "God, prove yourself in me, here and now. I need You."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)