September 11, 2009 • 12:13 pm
This is a question I’ve been asked on a number of occasions by everyone from my wife to colleagues to prominent pastors in my denomination. I have several reasons for blogging – some good, some for rather selfish reasons. So here’s a few of my reasons why I do this:
- I love to write. Writing has always been something I love doing. I’ve always dreamed of writing a few books (I actually have a list of about 11 possible topics). Blogging helps me to sort out my thoughts, bounce ideas around in a public forum, ask questions, wrestle, find answers, vent, help others, and the list goes on. As a pastor, blogging is one way in which I let people into my inner life, showing that I’m not perfect and often struggle with many of the same things others do. It may be safe to say that blogging/writing is a way for me to maintain my sanity.
- Vulnerability. This may be the most controversial reason for my blogging and is often the reason I find myself getting into trouble for what I say. It’s my opinion that vulnerability is a good thing, while most see it as a fault. Vulnerability often leads getting screwed over by someone or something or digging myself a hole. The common mindset is that church leaders should never make themselves as vulnerable as I often do. Frankly, conventional wisdom on this point doesn’t mean a whole lot to me. As a church member I want to know that my pastor is just as screwed up as I am (I’m sure that makes me weird). And so being pastor, I make myself vulnerable for the simple reason that I want people to know that they can come to me, talk to me, and complain to about anything…no limits.
- Discipleship. I certainly don’t expect anyone to actually become a saint as a result of reading what I write, but I do hope that readers can go away with something worth grasping on to. The unfortunate reality is that most followers of Jesus seldom ever open their Bible’s. Biblical literacy in the western world is in the toilet and that really bothers me. Over the years, I’ve developed a unwavering love affair with Scripture. I spend a lot of time thinking about it, meditating upon it, studying it, and looking for ways to applying to life. Much of my blogging revolves around my study of the Bible. This is an attempt to show people that Bible’s influence goes well beyond church, cutting right to the heart of everyday life. I’m also continually amazed that much of Scripture is not so cut-and-dry as Americans have long believed. For me that just helps to emphasize the awesomeness of what is contained within its pages. So I study it, become amazed by it, and pass on what I learn to the rest of the world – all in the hope that someone somewhere will gain through what I learn and in turn serve God better and grow in their own commitment to “The Walk.”
Filed under: Random
August 10, 2009 • 6:00 am
Honestly, this is one of the most difficult passage in the Gospels for me to make sense of. I know that sounds strange; it’s pretty straightforward after all. At some point after the Magi leave, Joseph has a dream in which an angel tells him to take the family to Egypt and escape persecution. But when you get down to the point of asking what this story means for Matthew’s overall narrative, things start to get pretty muddled. My suspicion at this point is that this story will make more sense once we get through the entire book and are able to look at things in a bigger picture (I’ll have to try and remember to come back to it after all’s said and done and see if I can make better sense out it).
A few not-so-obvious observations:
- By this point I’m starting to notice a trend: Matthew seldom addresses Mary by name. In many cases, she’s referred to more benignly within the phrase, “the child and his mother.” This seems a bit unexpected to me in light of the unconventional step of mentioning four women within Jesus family tree, Mary being one of them. Perhaps Matthew has suddenly had a change of heart? Or perhaps a reference to Mary no matter how “hidden” is still a compliment given the time period. In other words, Matthew is showing that God was not just concerned for the infant Jesus, but also for his mother.
- Matthew continues his generous use of the OT here, but this time in a way that most scholars today would string him up for. In other words, Matthew is applying various prophetic texts in a way that doesn’t seem to be completely in line with their original context. The first quotes Hosea 11:1, a text that is speaking of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt. The second OT quotation is form Jeremiah 31:15, and is a clear reference to the Babylonian captivity. While Matthew’s choice of words may be comforting to his readers, they seem an odd choice to us today.
- Furthermore, with these choices in “proof-text,” Matthew is drawing an unmistakeable connection between Jesus’ time in Egypt and Israel’s, as if to cast a typological glow on the Egyptian captivity (that is, it was a fore-telling of sorts and further evidence of Jesus’ identity).
I really struggle with making sense of the proof-texting. What exactly does it mean? What is its significance? What are we to glean through this?
I can safely say that the entire example of the exodus was a symbol of salvation. Israel was under the oppressive thumb of Pharaoh much as we are with sin. God sent a deliverer in Moses (like Jesus) and delivered his people (salvation) fulfilling his promise to give them a land of “milk and honey” (heaven in the form of Cana). But none of this applies to Jesus given that he was the one doing the delivering. The connection between Jesus being brought up out of Egypt and Israel brought out of Egypt is still weak to me.
Please don’t take this as a suggestion that there isn’t a good reason for these passages or that Matthew messed up, I’m just not sure what it is. There’s something there – I know there is. I just don’t know what. Any thoughts are much appreciated…
Filed under: Random
People Talk