Christians and stress (part 2)

Image by Ryan McGuire from Pixabay 

Dealing with stress

Relaxation techniques, attention to diet and exercise, time-management strategies, voluntary simplicity and community building are all valid and useful ways of reducing the stress in our lives. However, as Christians we must also deal with two underlying issues—fear and lack of focus.

Fear

So much of our busy-ness and sense of overload is due to fear; fear of failure, fear of being rejected, fear of loss, fear of illness and death, fear of losing control. Yet often we don't even recognise the fears that drive us. 

Both Christians and non-Christians may be driven by a subconscious fear of God. In the unbeliever this could even be a positive drive. In a Christian, it can only be due to an inadequate grasp of what salvation means. God may call us to be busy for him, but busy-ness can easily become our own attempt to win God's favour, if we don't understand that we are totally forgiven and accepted already. Jesus has completed that task, with nothing for us to add.

The key to overcoming all of these fears is to know what scripture says about them—really know, with our hearts as well as our heads. We can only do this by reading the bible consistently and prayerfully. Then we need to put what we have read into practice, as a conscious act of will. "God is my salvation, I WILL trust and WILL NOT be afraid, (my emphasis). 

Freedom from fear is not something we are likely to achieve in an instant.  Each time we become fearful again, we need to recognise it, ask for forgiveness and grace, then begin afresh. Other Christians are an invaluable and God-given source of encouragement in this.

Focus

Lack of focus in our lives results in us being pulled this way and that by competing demands and desires. We may have many different goals, all of them apparently good, but often quite contradictory. For instance, “I must spend more time with my family” and “I must work as hard as I can to get the promotion I deserve”. As a result we begin to feel fragmented.

Christians are not immune from this. Often we simply add a few spiritual goals to the rest rather than refocusing our lives.

Fear and lack of focus are obviously related. If I fear something (or someone) one of my goals will be to avoid or overcome the thing I fear. If I have many fears, I will have many different goals, and my mental, physical and emotional energies will be scattered in all directions. 

Jesus had focus

Jesus had only one focus in life; the kingdom of God, for the glory of God. He called his followers to be equally single-minded. "Seek first (God's) kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things (i.e. material needs) will be given you as well", (Matthew 6.33).

"Yes, but Jesus didn't have a job, or mortgage, or a family to worry about. He could afford to be single minded," we might reply. I don't think Jesus was calling us to abandon these things (though sometimes he does.) Rather, we are to look at them all in the light of the kingdom of God. 

The work we do is to contribute to building God's kingdom, whether we preach sermons, design cars or wash dishes. Our house is to be a part of God's kingdom, received with thanks, used for his service and given up if he asks that of us. Our children are to be raised for God's kingdom, not by brow-beating them, but by drawing them into it. If they choose to go another way, our focus is still to be God's kingdom. 

Our hobbies, our clothes, our friendships, our money, our possessions, our relationship with our in-laws, our health, all are to be seen in the light of God's kingdom.

When we look at Jesus' life, as described in the gospels, we can see the effects of being focused. Jesus had compassion on the crowds who followed him about, and healed many who were sick. Yet at times he would walk away from them in order to pray or teach his disciples. He was not driven by a need to be popular, or to (literally) cure all the world's ills. 

Jesus did not try to do everything himself. He taught his disciples, then sent them out in pairs to teach and heal. He shared his concerns with them. He entrusted the future church to them. He was not driven by the need to keep power to himself or to appear super-human.

Jesus had no hesitation in openly criticising or correcting those who were straying from the truth. He continued his ministry despite the growing opposition of the authorities. Fear of man did not come between him and his goal of bringing about the kingdom of God.

In prayer Jesus maintained the same focus. "Father, may your name be hallowed, may your kingdom come, may your will be done," (Matthew 6:9). The needs of the day followed on from this, not as though they were trivial, but placed in their true context. "Give us this day our daily bread." Through prayer, Jesus received the strength and direction he needed to stay focused.

Jesus certainly didn't live a gentle, stress-free life. He experienced tiredness, grief, pressure from the crowds, misunderstanding from his disciples, harassment from the religious authorities and ultimately betrayal, torture and death. Yet always he seemed to be in control, steady in his purpose and sure of where he was going. His resurrection is our assurance that in the end he reached his goal.

Being focused in this way, while it may seem difficult at first sight (and impossible without the help of the Holy Spirit) would surely enable us to simplify our lives and overcome the fragmentation we so often experience.

Perhaps that is what Jesus meant when he said "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." (Matthew 11.28-30.)

(Part 1 can be found here)

Holding on to faith

Most of us have probably wondered at some stage whether we can really go on being a Christian until the end of our lives. Our faith seems so weak and wobbly at times.

Perhaps we’ve struggled with doubts about certain doctrines, or felt puzzled and disturbed by something we've read in the Bible. Maybe we’ve tried to share the gospel with others and found ourselves flummoxed by their questions or their negative response.

Or perhaps we’re disheartened by our own lack of discipline in Bible reading, prayer and service. We determine to do better, but soon we get distracted by other things. Some distractions we have no control over, like illness in the family, but sometimes we’re way-laid by trivia. We begin to fear that we’re back-sliding so fast that soon we’ll be unable to hold on to our faith.

Christians in many parts of the world face much harsher threats to their faith. Their fear is that they may denounce Christ under torture, or hide their faith in order not to lose their livelihood. In comparison, our fears seem pathetic. But they are real, nevertheless. We’ve all met people who once were Christians, who now disclaim their faith. We don’t want to become like them.

The fact that we do fear losing our faith is actually reassuring. It’s a sign that the Spirit is still at work within us, otherwise why would we care? But how will we remain faithful?

It’s humbling, yet also heartening, to realise that in the end we remain in Christ because he who called us, and gave us faith to believe in him in the first place, continues to call us and give us faith. He gives us the faith to read, to understand, to pray, to act. He holds onto us when our thoughts are scattered or dreadful, when our reading and praying seem hollow, when we’re weary of doing good. (Phil 1:6)

And he provides faithful people around us to pray for us, and encourage us to keep going. The greatest prayer we can pray for another Christian is “Lord, preserve their faith”.

Why we need to be familiar with the whole of scripture

Two voices, one song*

In his letter to the church in Rome, Paul was writing to Christians who were at risk of believing that keeping the Jewish law was helpful, perhaps even necessary, for salvation. To help them understand that it was their faith in Jesus, not keeping the law, that put them right with God, he pointed out that Abraham was declared righteous by God before the covenant of circumcision was even introduced. He quoted Genesis 15:6, “And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.”

James' letter, on the other hand, was addressed to converts who, having rightly understood that they were saved by faith and no longer under the Jewish law, were at risk of going to the other extreme, thinking that they were free from all law. Any sort of “good work”, even loving a neighbour, could be seen as law-keeping and an attempt to win God’s favour.

He quoted the same verse from Genesis 15 that Paul used. But then he went on to say that this scripture “was fulfilled” just seven chapters later in Genesis 22:1-19, when God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham had faith when he believed God’s promise in chapter 15, but that faith was demonstrated in his obedience in chapter 22.

Peter, writing to Christians who were being persecuted, says that they should see their trials as a test of their faith, to show that it is genuine. (1 Peter 1:6-7) Perhaps he too was thinking of Abraham’s faith being tested by God in Genesis 22.

Here we have an example of why we need to be familiar with the whole of scripture. If we don’t know the Old Testament, we’ll have no idea what Paul and James are talking about, and we’ll have even less chance of seeing the allusion to the Old Testament by Peter.

If we’re only familiar with a few verses from Paul, we’ll think that James has missed the point about “salvation by faith alone”, and we may be at risk of falling into the same error as the people James was writing to (though that was never Paul’s intention). If we only read James, we may fall into the opposite error. Knowing the whole helps us to make sense of the parts.


*Image by Ian MacKenzie, https://www.flickr.com/photos/madmack/424759185

Asking God to explain himself

“Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” Genesis 18:25

The Old Testament is vital to our understanding of who Jesus is and what he said and did. Yet it’s not always easy to read. Sometimes the problem is our distance in time and culture from when it was written. A good commentary can help us to understand the context. But the greater difficulty for many of us comes with those passages that make us exclaim “That’s awful! Why would God say or do that? What sort of God is this?” Many atheists point to these passages as a reason for their atheism.

Some would argue that if it’s in the Bible, it’s God’s word, and that’s that. Whether we like it or not, we have to accept what we read. We should never presume to question God. Such questioning is the first step on the road to unbelief.

But the Old Testament itself is full of people who were startled and disturbed by God’s words and actions and questioned him about his motives. Abraham (Genesis 18:16-33), Moses (Exodus 5:22-23, Numbers 11:11), Joshua (Joshua 7:7), Gideon (Judges 6:13) David (Psalm 10:1), Isaiah (Isaiah 63:17) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 12:1) all at some time cried a horrified “Why, Lord?”. The writers of the books of Job, Jonah and Habakkuk each sought to answer the question of how God’s righteousness and faithfulness could be reconciled with his actions (or inactivity).

What distinguished them from most atheists is that they genuinely sought understanding, and sought it from God himself, rather than using their questions as an excuse for unbelief. Underlying their questions was a solid belief not just in God’s existence but in his goodness and righteousness, based on their own experience. And although they were direct, even blunt, in speaking with God, they acknowledged that they were presuming on his grace in doing so. In humility they remained aware that they were created beings asking for answers from their Creator.

image by eric 

The Pharisees had something right

"Let us then approach God's throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need." (Hebrews 4:16)

The Pharisees knew the scriptures well. They knew that in order to approach a good and holy God, you must live a life of scrupulous obedience to his law. Since no human being could hope to live a perfectly sinless life, a sacrifice was needed to atone for your sins. Then you must have a priest appointed by God to act as your intermediary. Only then was it safe to approach God. Those who encountered him unprepared, like Isaiah, cried out in terror at his presence (Isaiah 6:5).

When a young preacher from Galilee claimed that he was God in human form, it was easy enough to see that his claims were false. He ate and drank with blatant sinners. He let those made unlcean by diseases touch him. He didn't allow his disciples to stop anyone from coming to him. Even gentile sinners were welcome. And he talked to God with the familiarity of a child with his father.

In one sense the Pharisees were right. How could God appear among them and not consume those who approached him carelessly and in sin? Jesus was not even a priest, so how could he pretend to represent God? Were his claims not blasphemous?

What they didn't understand was that Jesus himself was living a sinless life, the only truly sinless life, on behalf of those who came to him. Jesus himself was the ultimate sacrifice for sin that would end all sacrifices. Jesus was the great high priest who would be the eternal intermediary between God and his people.

While the Pharisees’ problem was that they couldn’t imagine a holy God appearing among them, our problem is that we sometimes take it for granted. We “approach the throne of grace” with a confidence that is based on a diminished view of God’s holiness rather than an appreciation of Jesus’ role in making it possible. In an act of sheer grace, our holy and loving God has provided us with all that we need to come to him. Who could imagine that?

Don't be alarmed

People have been predicting the imminent end of the world and Jesus' second coming since his ascension. Some of these predictions have been based on supposed prophetic visions or dreams. Others have focused on auspicious dates such as the years 500, 1000  and 2000 AD. Calculations based on the book of Revelation have produced a wide range of dates, most of which have already passed by uneventfully.

Cataclysmic events such as the sacking of Rome (410 AD), the bubonic plague  in 1347-53, and the wars of 1914 and 1939 have also prompted people to  predict the imminent end of the world. Anxiety being created today by various crises internationally is likely to lead to a rise in end-of-the-world forecasts.

The Bible restrains us from making such predictions or becoming anxious about them. For one thing, it provides a record of wars, famines, plagues and disasters spanning over 2000 years. Whatever dreadful thing is happening in our world today, we can be sure to find something similar in the history described in its pages. "There is nothing new under the sun" (Ecc. 1:9). In all these events, God remains sovereign.

Secondly, we have Jesus' words in Matthew 24:6-8 "You will hear of wars and rumours of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.  All these are the beginning of birth-pains." What midwives call "practice contractions" in other words.

Jesus assures us that when the end does come and he returns it will be both sudden and obvious. In the meantime may our response to what is happening in the world be compassion and prayer for those affected, trust and steadfastness in our own situation.

Image: by tarotastic / photo on flickr

The violence of the Old Testament - Part 3

This is part 3 of a series. See Part 1 and Part 2

Human-initiated violence in the Old Testament

In part 1 we looked at the human propensity towards violence. While the level of violence in a society ebbs and flows over time, it is never absent. Those who would not think of taking part in violent activity themselves may still watch violence or read about it as a form of entertainment.

Human nature hasn't changed, and much of the violence described in the Old Testament (not to mention the New Testament) is evidence of that. The Bible chronicles life as it is, not as it should be. Life in the Ancient Near East was hard and brutal, tribes and nations went to war with each other and families squabbled then as frequently as they do now. Much of the violence that is recounted in the Old Testament is initiated by sinful human beings. Often such violence is condemned, by the writers and/or by God (eg Psalm 11:5, Proverbs 3:31, Malachi 2:16) But not always. 

Persian warriors

As I've mentioned before, the fact that some activity is recounted in the Old Testament doesn't necessarily mean that it’s being approved. Unless a commentary is added by the writer, the reader is left to decide for themselves what the significance of any particular event might be. Sometimes a violent episode is recounted to demonstrate how bad things had become (the events of Judges 19, for instance). 

That's all very well. But what of the violence that seems to be specifically commanded or carried out by God? If we're not going to pretend it doesn't exist, and we're on shaky ground suggesting that God's words of command have simply been added by the human authors of the texts, (see part 2) what are we to make of it?

The violence of the Old Testament - Part 2

(Thursday thesis)

This is the second part of a series on violence in the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. Part 1 can be found here. And yes, I know it's not Thursday, I'm posting this late.

Two options that don't work

Ignoring the violence of the Old Testament isn't an option for several reasons. First, it suggests that we’re afraid of what conclusions we might come to if we did face it. We’re afraid that our image of God and the way he works might have to be revised in ways that we’re not comfortable with. We’d rather stick with the censored Bible and the blurry image of God we’re familiar with.

But living in fear of discovering the truth isn't healthy, psychologically or spiritually. It puts us constantly on guard against anything that might disturb our carefully constructed version of truth. It means that our faith is not really placed solidly on the God of the Bible, but on an idol of our own construction. We’re creating our own cannon of books and passages that are acceptable to us.

If the God of the Bible really is a cruel and sadistic monster, as the New Atheists suggest, then we should be right to reject him as they do. But not bothering to find out whether it’s true or not seems bizarre. Hoping that it isn't true is not faith but wishful thinking.

Ignoring the violence of the Old Testament also ensures that we live in fear of other people questioning us about it. We’ll find ourselves unwilling to invite people to church or our Bible study group if we know that one of the ‘difficult’ passages from the Old Testament is going to be read. We’ll avoid suggesting that people read the Bible for themselves, or point them only to the New Testament. We’ll look embarrassed and give a half-hearted answer when we are questioned about difficult passages. Fear will kill our desire to evangelise, or lead us to offer a short and sweetened version of the gospel.

Ignoring the violence of parts of the Old Testament means that we’ll have no biblical way to understand the violence in the New Testament or in the world around us. The crucifixion will be a jarring aberration in an otherwise peaceful landscape. The final judgement scenes in Revelation will seem out of place. The lavender-scented version of the world that comes from our edited Bible won’t match up with a reality where war, brutality, rape, domestic violence, murder and a host of other evils are on display daily.

The violence of the Old Testament - part 1

A smiting God

The word 'smite' is seldom used today, yet everyone seems to know its meaning. The reason they know is that everyone is aware, whether they've read the Bible or not, that a lot of 'smiting' went on in the Old Testament. And often God was the one doing the smiting.

Tissot: the taking of Jericho

Recent translations of the Bible don't use the word smite. But the perception that the Old Testament is full of violence, much of it ordered or carried out by God himself, hasn't gone away. New Atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins have made much of it, painting a picture of God as a violent and sadistic monster, promoting genocide

But it's not just the ignorant and the New Atheists who are disturbed by the violence of parts of the Old Testament. Many Christians are disturbed by it too. For some, the violence is intolerable, more than they can stomach. Their solution has been to reject the Bible as a source of truth and walk away from their faith. I have been tempted to do this myself at times.

And surely we should be deeply concerned when we read of God ordering the Israelites to slaughter every living thing in a city, including women, children and even the animals (Deut 20:16-18, Jos 6:21). Or when Moses is outraged on God's behalf because the Israelites have spared the women and children of Midian. (Num 31:7-19). What sort of God tells parents to have their unruly son put to death? (Deut 21:18-21) or orders the stoning of adulterers? (Lev 20:10)

Who hasn't winced when such passages have been the reading for the day? What Bible study leader or preacher hasn't wished they could avoid such passages in their teaching of the Bible? Isn't the Old Testament giving us a picture of a God that would feel familiar to the Taliban? Haven't such passages been the justification for so much blood shed and war in the name of God over the centuries?

Paul – not our role model

(Monday musings)

The apostle Paul is often put forward as an example for all Christians to follow in sharing the gospel with others. And when it comes to his love for Christ, his obedience, his courage and his commitment, he is certainly a great example.

But I wonder if Paul is really the best guide for the ‘average’ Christian to be urged to follow when it comes to delivering the message of the gospel. Paul was a single man with (as far as we know) no dependents. His occupation (making tents) could be carried out anywhere. His Roman citizenship gave him the right to go anywhere in the Roman Empire, and to some extent provided him protection. He was free to travel from place to place.

As a former Pharisee, Paul had a well-respected theological education and the skills to expertly interpret scripture. He was trained to lead, teach and write.

More importantly, as an Apostle, Paul had a very specific calling to be an evangelist which followed his dramatic conversion on the Damascus road. Clearly he was well equipped for the role, or perhaps we should say, the Lord had wonderfully prepared him for it.

The problem with Paul being held up as an example is that few of us can identify closely with him. We may have families. We have jobs that may not easily be transferred from place to place. Our theological education is limited (though we can certainly always learn more.) We may not have leadership skills, speaking skills, or the ability to teach. And most of us have not received a clear calling to be evangelists. We are all called to be witnesses of what we have seen and heard and know of the Lord Jesus.

The risk is that, in comparing ourselves with Paul, we feel inadequate for the task we think we’re called to do and give up. What we really need to know is what Paul had to say to the Christians he was writing to about how they were to go about being witnesses to Christ. He didn't ask them all to join him in his travels. What did he tell them to do? What were they to say to the people around them? How were they to demonstrate the good news of the gospel to their neighbours? The answers to these questions, rather than Paul himself, are where we will find our guide to being witnesses.

Does the Old Testament demean women? (Reading the Old Testament part 7)

"The Old Testament is fundamentally a blokes' book, written by men, about men, and for men. Women are seldom mentioned, and when they are, it is usually as the property, whores or victims of men. Modern women will find little encouragement in reading such a chauvinistic, misogynist text."

Or so the commonly held theory goes. And let's face it, it's not an entirely untrue assessment of the Old Testament. As far as anyone can be sure, none of the books of the Old Testament were written by women. The society described (or should we say 'societies' since the Old Testament covers a period of over a thousand years) is decidedly patriarchal. The laws given in the books of the Pentateuch sometimes seem to treat women as second class citizens. The focus is frequently on political struggles, battles, wars, and rapine. Why would any woman want to read it?

Not-so-simple questions about the Old Testament (Reading the Old Testament part 6)

Asking “who, what, when” questions can be very helpful in understanding the Old Testament. But what about the “difficult” passages – the ones you hope your unbelieving friends won’t read (but they inevitably do, and then want you to explain why you would want them to read such a barbaric, sexist, racist book.) I’m thinking of texts such as Deuteronomy 20:10-18, Numbers 5:11-31, Judges 19, etc

The usual response to such questions is to attempt to explain away the difficulties those passages pose by appealing to cultural differences, poor translation of the text and/or the overwhelming sovereignty of God. Although many commentators frustratingly gloss over the difficulties, there are lots of books on the market that valiantly tackle them.

Some explanations are helpful. Others border on being rationalisations, or seem barely more acceptable than the passages they seek to explain. Many are just as culturally bound to the author’s time as the original texts were to theirs.

I’d like to suggest a different approach, one that doesn’t attempt to squeeze the Old Testament into our own comfort zone.

First, we need to recognise that there is nothing new about finding parts of the Old Testament objectionable. The Gnostic Bishop Marcion in the second century was so appalled by the Old Testament that he produced his own version of the Bible which excluded it (along with large chunks of the New Testament.) He was condemned as a heretic for his views, but he still had an audience.

Augustine of Hippo, who lived in the 4th century, was brought up in a Christian family. But as a young adult he dismissed the Old Testament as crude and barbaric compared to the writings of people like Cicero and the Manicheans. He later became one of the greatest theologians, and came to terms with the Old Testament. So Christianity hasn’t fallen apart because of these difficult passages, despite generations of struggling with them.

Second, we need to recognise that the Bible often leaves us to draw our own conclusions about the “rightness or wrongness” of a story. The fact that something happens in the Bible without comment doesn’t mean that it is therefore approved as God’s will. It could just as well be an example of human depravity. Wisdom is required.

Third, and more importantly, we have to deal with Jesus’ attitude towards the Old Testament. Most of our ‘modern’ objections to the apparent sexism, racism etc of the Old Testament are actually based on Jesus’ own teaching about loving our enemies, and Jesus’ example of treating all people with compassion and respect for their dignity. It would be ironic if we rejected the Old Testament while using the teaching of the one who inspired its writers and who appealed to it so often.

I'm not suggesting that Jesus  openly commended the passages we find so difficult. He didn't quote them or even allude to them as far as I'm aware. He sometimes added his own teaching to the words of scripture: “You have heard it said…but I say to you…”

But nowhere did he condemn the scriptures (the Old Testament of our Bible), though he often condemned its misuse (Matthew 23:4). He said that he had not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. (Matthew 5:17) He told his disciples that the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms spoke about him (Luke 24:41). We don’t have a mandate from Jesus to dump the Old Testament.

To be honest, I don’t know what to make of this in terms of how we should read the 'difficult' texts. But it says to me that if Jesus could live with the Old Testament as it was written, not as we’d like it to be, we should also be willing to live with it, even if we can’t explain everything in it. Jesus lived with the brutality and sexism and discrimination of the world around him, not accepting it, but not running from it or destroying it. He offered the world a new way to live, then died to redeem that world. Is there perhaps a sense in which Jesus also ‘redeemed’ the Old Testament?

We are people of the New Testament. We live by Christ’s standards and understand the world through his teachings and those of his disciples. More importantly we have the Spirit of Christ within us, who strives to show us the mind of Christ. It’s easy to throw up our hands and say “this is too much, I can’t stomach this” when we come across something unpalatable in the Old Testament. (I know, I've done it often.) Perhaps where we struggle with the text we should simply bring it to him and be content to wait for understanding. Then let's go on reading.

This post is part 6 of a series on reading the Old Testament:

Reading the Old Testament part 7 - Is the Old Testament misogynistic?
Reading the Old Testament part 6 - Not-so-simple questions about the Old Testament
Reading the Old Testament part 5 - A simple set of questions to use when reading the Old Testament 
Reading the Old Testament part 4 - The Old Testament wasn't written in a day
Reading the Old Testament part 3 - Remember the Old Testament is old
Reading the Old Testament part 2 - Getting an overview
Reading the Old Testament part 1 - Know your history

Reading the Old Testament - 4. The Old Testament wasn't written in a day

Unlike the books of the New Testament which were all written within 100 years of Jesus’ resurrection, the books of the Old Testament were written over many hundreds of years. This has a number of implications.

First, most of the human authors of the Old Testament books didn’t know each other. They didn’t collude together or work to a set agenda. They didn’t set out to write “The Old Testament”. It was only after the books were collected together, quite late in Jewish history, that the Old Testament came into being.

Second, each wrote for a particular group of people in a particular situation at a particular time. So although there is an amazing underlying unity to the Old Testament books that results from God’s faithfulness and purposes, each book has its own focus, its own style. At times this results in what may seem almost contradictory attitudes and ideas. For instance, the histories provided by the authors of the books of Kings and of Chronicles are not identical in detail or emphasis.

Third, the culture and faith of Israel changed over time and this is reflected in the Old Testament texts. The people who left Egypt and worshipped in a tent were very different people to those who were worshipping in the temple in Solomon’s reign, although obviously human nature being what it is, they shared some common longings and failings. The people who returned from exile had different experiences, different hopes and consequently different beliefs and practices to those who had gone into exile. Israel’s faith waxed and waned and struggled and matured over time. This is reflected in the text.

Fourthly, the later texts often make reference to earlier texts. So, for instance, Jeremiah assumes that his readers are aware of the contents of the book of Deuteronomy and alludes to it often. The Psalms refer back to Genesis, Exodus and other narratives. This can be helpful in working out when a book was written.

Fifth, there is a gradual unfolding of God’s plans. We read the texts as people who've jumped to the last chapter of the story and have read the ending. But the people in the story didn't always know where the plot was leading, so to speak. We shouldn't expect them to see things the way we do. They were faithful, mostly, to what had been revealed to them, but God revealed himself through the events of history as well as through personal revelation to the prophets.

This post is part 4 of a series on reading the Old Testament:

Reading the Old Testament part 7 - Is the Old Testament misogynistic?
Reading the Old Testament part 6 - Not-so-simple questions about the Old Testament
Reading the Old Testament part 5 - A simple set of questions to use when reading the Old Testament 
Reading the Old Testament part 4 - The Old Testament wasn't written in a day
Reading the Old Testament part 3 - Remember the Old Testament is old
Reading the Old Testament part 2 - Getting an overview
Reading the Old Testament part 1 - Know your history

Reading the Old Testament - 3. Remember the Old Testament is old

The Old Testament was written a long time ago. That's stating the obvious, but we don't always remember the obvious. We come to the text expecting it to be easy to read and immediately relevant to our daily lives. Why is that? Perhaps it's because we think of it as the 'living word of God' True, God is always up to date. He's as familiar with the Internet as he is with camels and the pyramids. The truth of his word is always new and relevant. But the actual text of the Old Testament is old - very old.

The last book in the Old Testament was written several hundred years before Jesus' birth. The earliest books were written at least eight centuries before Christ. (Much older dates are proposed by some scholars.) That would make them as old as Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, and hundreds of years older than books by Herodotus, Confucius, Plato and other 'ancient' authors. How many of us would pick up one of their books and expect to immediately understand everything we read?

Human nature hasn't changed. But human cultures change all the time. We see that happening in the Bible itself. Over the period covered by the Old Testament the culture of the Israelites and the people around them changed considerably. How much more have things changed since then.

We shouldn't expect the Old Testament to speak in a way that's in tune with our own culture, any more than we'd expect Homer's Iliad or Sophocles plays to be culturally familiar. That's not to say that the Old Testament has nothing relevant to say to us, but the cultural setting of any text needs to be remembered and wisdom used in understanding and applying it to our time. It's not 'cheating' to use Study Bible notes, commentaries, and other resources to help us understand the background and setting of what we're reading.

This post is part 3 of a series on reading the Old Testament:

Reading the Old Testament part 7 - Is the Old Testament misogynistic?
Reading the Old Testament part 6 - Not-so-simple questions about the Old Testament
Reading the Old Testament part 5 - A simple set of questions to use when reading the Old Testament 
Reading the Old Testament part 4 - The Old Testament wasn't written in a day
Reading the Old Testament part 3 - Remember the Old Testament is old
Reading the Old Testament part 2 - Getting an overview
Reading the Old Testament part 1 - Know your history

Reading the Old Testament – 2. Getting an overview

It’s important when reading the Old Testament (and the New Testament for that matter) to know the context of what you’re reading. The best way to do that is to read large chunks of it, before honing in on smaller portions. Ideally, everything you read in the Bible should be seen in the context of the surrounding chapters and verses, the book you are reading, the history of the period it describes, and that in which it was written, and the Bible as a whole.

If possible, read the whole of a book right through at least once before studying it verse by verse. Obviously that’s not usually possible with a book like Genesis or Isaiah, (although it makes a good project for a long journey or a weekend break.) But with shorter books it is well worth taking the time. Don’t get bogged down in genealogies and long lists of names and places, just skim over them on this first reading.

By reading a book right through you’ll get a sense of how the writer constructed the text, you’ll often start to see patterns in what is said, and you will have more sense of what the writer was trying to achieve. Then you can go back and look at the text in more detail.

Reading long sections of the Bible is like climbing to the top of a hill to get an overview of the landscape, before descending to follow the trail. It helps you to keep your bearings when you’re in rugged country and stops you losing sight of the forest for the trees.

This post is part 2 of a series on reading the Old Testament:

Reading the Old Testament part 7 - Is the Old Testament misogynistic?
Reading the Old Testament part 6 - Not-so-simple questions about the Old Testament
Reading the Old Testament part 5 - A simple set of questions to use when reading the Old Testament 
Reading the Old Testament part 4 - The Old Testament wasn't written in a day
Reading the Old Testament part 3 - Remember the Old Testament is old
Reading the Old Testament part 2 - Getting an overview
Reading the Old Testament part 1 - Know your history

Beyond a second exodus

(Monday musings)

Parallels between Jesus and Moses abound. Both of them spent time in the desert before they were called to lead God’s people. Both led their people in a great exodus from slavery – slavery in Egypt in Moses case, slavery to sin in Jesus case. Both took their people across a seemingly impassable barrier – the Sea of Reeds in Moses case, death itself in Jesus’ case. Both brought their people to the brink of a promised land, literally for Moses, more figuratively for Jesus. Both gave their people the teaching and commandments of God.

The New Testament writers make much of this parallel, although they are at pains to point out that Jesus is far greater than Moses. Jesus is not only the one who leads his people in exodus, but he himself is the lamb who was slain, whose blood marks out those who belong to him and spares them from the angel of death. In describing the meeting between Jesus, Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration, Luke uses the Greek word for ‘exodus’ to describe Jesus’ death-defeating mission, although it is often translated as ‘departure’ in English. (Luke 9:31)

But in seeing the parallels between the salvation from sin and death won by Jesus and the exodus from slavery into the promised land led by Moses, we must not miss the vital differences. The exodus was the beginning of the fulfilment of the covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15) which was brought closer to completion at Sinai (Mt Horeb) in a new covenant between God and the people of Israel. But between the exodus and the books of the gospel lies another promised covenant.

We already see it foreshadowed at the end of Deuteronomy. In chapter 28 God speaks (through Moses) of the blessings associated with keeping faith with him and obeying his law, and the curses that will come about as a result of forsaking God and his commandments.

But at the beginning of chapter 30 God says “And when all these things come upon you, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before you, and you call them to mind among all the nations where the Lord your God has driven you…” (Deut 30:1, my italics). In other words, while the people are being offered a clear choice, God already forsees that they will not be able to keep faith. It’s not that the commandments themselves are hard to find, or obscure or difficult to understand (Deut 30.11-14). It’s the heart of the people that is the problem.

In Deuteronomy 30.6 comes a promise: “the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.” This promise is for a time after God brings the people back from exile (verse 5).

The same promise is picked up again by Jeremiah when writing to the exiles. “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” (Jer. 31:33). It’s repeated by Ezekiel, also writing at the time of the exile. “And I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them. I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh” (Ez 11:19, see also Ez 36:26).

This promise of a new heart is fulfilled through the death and resurrection of Jesus and the sending of the Holy Spirit. If we miss its importance, we will think that we now stand in the same relationship to God as the people of Israel did as they prepared to cross the Jordan. We will think that we have been rescued from death and forgiven through the blood of the lamb, and now we are called to do our best to love God and to keep his commandments.

We have been rescued, and we are called to keep the commandments Jesus gave us. But as Paul describes in Romans 7, delighting in God’s law is one thing, doing it is another. Our spirits are willing, but our flesh, our human nature, is weak. If we are left to ourselves, we will fail, just as surely as the people of Israel did. Who will deliver us from this body of death? (Rom 7:24)

The answer is, God will, in Christ Jesus. “For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” (Rom 8:3-4, my italics.)

It’s not just that what stood against us has been cancelled, and we are counted as righteous through Jesus death, (wonderful as that is). God has also provided a way in which “the righteous requirements of the law might be fulfilled in us.” He is making it possible for us to be righteous. How? Through “Christ in you”, through the Holy Spirit.

Conversion involves more than just changing our minds about the Lordship of Christ and accepting the forgiveness offered to us. It also means a change of heart. Our old lives are buried with Christ and in return we receive his life. To the extent that we allow him to live through us, we will find that the commandments are no longer a burden or a restriction on what we do. We will no longer even be focussed on what we should not do, but will find ourselves drawn into a more positive, proactive and loving way of life, the life of Christ.

Jesus is not simply the final fulfilment of the promises made to Abraham, but he fulfils all of the promises made in the Old Testament, including those of Jeremiah and Ezekiel.  The people who crossed the Jordan were the same people who left Egypt (albeit a generation older and wiser). But the disciples after Pentecost were not the same people who ate the last supper. The New Testament describes something radically new.

Reading the Old Testament - 1. Know your history

Before you begin reading the Old Testament it’s helpful to have an overview of Old Testament history.Then you’ll have some idea of where the text that you are reading fits into the overall story.

The books of the Old Testament are not arranged chronologically, although the narratives in the books from Genesis to Nehemiah do follow Jewish history fairly closely. Having a basic outline of the events of the Old Testament in mind when reading the Psalms, say, or the prophetic books, will help you to understand their context and purpose.

For instance, the book of Jeremiah opens by saying that Jeremiah was active in the time of Josiah, King of Judah, until the time when the people of Jerusalem were taken into exile. (Jer 1:1-3). You’ll understand a lot more of what Jeremiah had to say if you know something about this period.

This short video, written and narrated by Andrew Wilson, provides a useful and easy-to-remember summary of the whole Old Testament.



As the video makes clear, the narratives of the Old Testament are not just Jewish history but also theological history. That is, they are interested in what God was doing through the events as they happened, and what his purposes were.

The video also brings out the important connections between Old Testament history and the life of Jesus in the New Testament. Jesus is not only the ultimate end or goal of history, but all history points to him.

This post is part 1 of a series on reading the Old Testament:

Reading the Old Testament part 7 - Is the Old Testament misogynistic?
Reading the Old Testament part 6 - Not-so-simple questions about the Old Testament
Reading the Old Testament part 5 - A simple set of questions to use when reading the Old Testament 
Reading the Old Testament part 4 - The Old Testament wasn't written in a day
Reading the Old Testament part 3 - Remember the Old Testament is old
Reading the Old Testament part 2 - Getting an overview
Reading the Old Testament part 1 - Know your history

Waiting in the dark

We look back on the birth of Jesus and his life, death and resurrection as an almost inevitable event in the process of biblical history. The coming of the messiah was promised from the beginning in Genesis and repeatedly foretold by the prophets. Then it happened, just as God said it would.

But that's from our perspective, looking back. What did people make of the promise when they were being marched into exile in Babylon? How did it look to those in the time between Israel’s return from exile and the actual event of Christ’s birth, when nothing seemed to be happening? It's easy to see God's faithfulness in hindsight, much harder when his promises are yet to be fulfilled or prayers are yet to be answered.

No wonder Simeon responded with such awe and gratitude when he held the infant Jesus in his arms (Luke 2:25-32). Here at last was the vindication of those who had continued to believe that the promise would be fulfilled.

Recognising this gives us a new perspective on the promised second coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead. We live in that time between the promise and the event, and sometimes it seems that nothing is happening. Life goes on pretty much as it always has. At times we forget that God has said it will happen and we become absorbed in our day to day life. We might even doubt the validity of the whole idea. But one day it will happen. And then it will seem just as inevitable as Christ's first coming.

What do you hear when you read?

We're all aware that the meaning of a sentence in English can be altered by where we put the emphasis. Take the simple sentence "I like you". Depending on how it's said, it could mean "I like you, even if no-one else does," "I like you, but I don't love you" or "I like you, but not him". Unless we're given some clue from the context, we don't know in what sense the sentence is being used.

The meaning we read into a text can also be influenced by what we already know about the context. With dialogue, a lot will depend on what we know, or assume, about the speaker. I was thinking about this while reading Genesis 3 recently.

God says to Eve " “What is this that you have done?” (v 13). It's obviously a question, but how should we read it? What tone of voice does God take?

If we think of God as the cosmic policeman, we'll probably read it as if he's interrogating Eve, notebook and pencil in hand. If we think of God as the powerful king of the universe, we'll read it as a stern demand for an answer.

If we think of God as the good creator, we'll hear the tone of horror in his voice that any artist would express if he found his newly finished work vandalised. But if we picture God as a loving father, we'll hear the same anguish in his voice as a parent who has found their daughter almost unconscious with an empty pill bottle in her hand. What do you hear when you read it?