Gospel of Matthew #1: devotional guide
JANUARY 28, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
A devotional guide to the Gospel of Matthew [1]
Week 1
Monday: Read Matt 1:1-25
The second word in the Greek text of Matt 1:1 is the word geneseos, which might be woodenly taken as “Genesis.” The word is used as a title for the book of Genesis (Gen 2:4; 5:1). This suggests that 1:1 is likely a title for the Gospel of Matthew and not just the intro to the genealogy that follows. A good translation for Matt 1:1 would be something along the lines of: “the book of the story of Jesus.”
Okay, I know that you are not going to read the genealogy and that you will skip immediately to 1:18 and conclude that today’s reading was quite easy! Well, how about if you go back and note the following things from the genealogy.
First, it should be read in three parts—which many translations recognize by putting paragraph breaks before verse 2, in the middle of verse 6, and before verse 12. We know that this is how the genealogy breaks down because Matthew tells us in 1:17.
Also, note that it has 14 generations in each section. Furthermore, each of the three sections are arranged in accord with major epochs of Israelites history (Abraham and the establishment of the Jewish people; to David and the Monarchy; then to the exile). Jesus is the point in which the history of Israel has reached its climax!
NB: the determinetruth podcast on Feb 8, 2022, will highlight all of this and provide more insights into the significance of all this.
Finally, note the presence of women in the genealogy! That should strike us as odd.
Matthew, then, is tying the story of Jesus to the larger story of Israel: from Abraham to David to the exile to Jesus. (There is even more to it than this; so check out the podcast for more details).
This means that when the angel declares to Joseph that, “He will save His people from their sins” (1:21), we should not read this in light of our western, individualism. That is, it is not talking about our personal sins that lead us to separation from God. It is addressing the sins that led the people of Israel into exile from the land.
Matthew’s introduction makes it clear: salvation is coming to Israel! Jesus has come to bring the exile to an end and to establish the long-awaited kingdom of God.
Questions to ponder/discuss: Look through the genealogy and note the prominence of women in the genealogy. Why do you suppose that Matthew went out of his way to include these women? Did you notice that four of the women in the genealogy were gentiles (non-Jews)? What might be the significance of this? (hint: think “kingdom of God”)
NB: I will be speaking at this zoom conference on Feb 11 & 12. Click here to register for this FREE event.
Tuesday: Read Matt 2:1-23: Hosea 11:1-12
Matthew 1:18-2:23 is an interesting text for the discussion of biblical interpretation. The reason is that in this section Matthew provides five fulfillment passages. In these fulfillment passages, a significant event in the life of the people of Israel is recast in terms of the Jesus story—as though the OT story was a “prophecy” about Jesus.
Most intriguing is the flight of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus to Egypt (1:13-15). One of the difficulties that arise here is that Matthew says, “that the prophet might be fulfilled” (1:15). Matthew, however, cites Hosea 11:1 as the “prophecy” that is being fulfilled. The problem (at least for us it appears to be a problem—though it is important to note that Matthew clearly did not think that this was a problem) is that Hos 11:1 is not a prophecy. It is a historical reminiscence. It is a reminder of when God brought His people out of Egypt.
Another difficulty with this verse is that Matthew appears to use Hos 11:1 to describe Jesus’ family leaving Judea and going to Egypt (this is of course highly disputed in the scholarly world). But the “prophecy” in Hos 11:1 relates to the Israelites leaving (or going “from”) Egypt.
Another example of the oddity of Matthew’s “fulfillment” passages is in 2:23. Here Matt says, “This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophets: ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” Note that Matthew says, “the prophets” (plural). This is a clue that something is going on. The “problem”—at least for us—is that there is no prophecy in the OT that says this.
How might we reconcile all this? I think the answer is simple: Matthew (and all the NT writers are doing this) is reading the entire story of the OT (from Abraham to the exile) as fulfilled in Jesus! It is not a particular verse here or there. It is the whole story. And it is about Jesus.
NB: we will address this on the determinetruth podcast on Feb 15, 2022.
Therefore, Matthew can apply Hos 11:1 to Jesus. It is as if Matthew is saying, “what God did for Israel, He did for Jesus. Or to say it another way, If Jesus is Israel (embodying the people of God), then what happened to them may be applied to Jesus. In fact, as we will continue to note as we proceed through Matthew, the story of Jesus is the story of Israel being retold through the lens of the One through whom the fulfillment came!
This means that we too must learn to read the OT through the lens of Jesus. Of course, this doesn’t mean that we do not also continue to read the OT in light of its own context and story.
NB: we will note, however, when we get to the study of John, that the fulfillment of the story does not stop at Jesus! The story continues through the people of God (us) today. Without this understanding, we would be missing the significance of the NT story and message for the church today.
Questions to ponder/discuss: The killing of the innocent in 2:16-18 reminds us of another king/ruler that killed the innocent children of Israel. Any recollections?
(hint: for you older folks: think Charlton Heston: for you younger folks: google Charlton Heston) What does reading the story of Jesus as the fulfillment of the story of Israel mean for us today?
Wednesday: Read Matt 3:1-17
In case we were not convinced that the story of Jesus is about the coming of the kingdom of God, we need to look no further than John the Baptist’s affirmation, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (3:2).[2] Since the coming of the kingdom of God includes the “forgiveness of sins” (1:21), it only stands to reason that one must “repent” to enter.
The significance of “repent” for the story of Jesus and the kingdom is profound. If this is the only pre-requisite for entering the kingdom of God, then it means that anyone can gain membership into the kingdom of God—provided that they repent! This is why the “good news” is good news to the poor, the widow, the leper, and the tax collector. Such persons were considered “outsiders” by the ruling elite in Jerusalem. Jesus says that entrance is for all—including them! (We will see the significance of this for the Roman world in the Gospel of Luke).
This is why John the Baptist rails against those who considered themselves exempt from repentance (Pharisees and the religious elite) because they considered themselves as already being the children of Abraham (3:9).
We should also note that repentance cannot be mere words. Nor does repentance stop when the prayer is over. John urges, “bear fruit in keeping with repentance” (3:8). Repentance acknowledges that Jesus is Lord and that His kingdom is just. Then, genuine repentance lives as though this is indeed true.
Finally, note that the “good news” is not all good news. John the Baptist goes on to explain that the evidence that the kingdom of God is at hand is that, “The axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (3:10). Those who fail to repent, those who rely on their lineage, or any other alleged credential, will be cut down.
Questions to ponder/discuss: Repentance is not merely acknowledging that Jesus is Lord. Perhaps you have already done that. It includes living it out daily. This means that repentance is an ongoing activity and that the fruit of repentance is reflected in our daily living. What do you need help repenting for and living in accordance with? Ask the Lord for help. Also, find a trusted friend that you will pray for you, encourage you, and keep you accountable in this area.
Thursday: Read Matt 4:1-22: See: Deut 8:3; 6:16; 6:13
After His baptism, Jesus is led by the Holy Spirit to the wilderness (4:1). Lest we think that this is a sweet story of God leading His people as a shepherd leads his flock, we would do well to recognize that the wilderness is a place of trial and testing. Yep, the Holy Spirit is leading Jesus into a war zone. And the enemy, the arch-villain himself, the Satan is awaiting Him there!
The point of the story is that Jesus is facing the same temptations to which Israel succumbed when they journeyed in the wilderness. The only difference is that Jesus succeeds where Israel failed.
Note that each of Jesus’ responses to the devil corresponds to Moses’ response to Israel’s failures in the wilderness (Deut 8:3; 6:16; 6:13). In each case, the text indicates how Israel should have responded to their temptations but did not. But we need not fear, for Jesus was faithful. As a result, the new people of God have been established.
Questions to ponder/discuss: What do you think was a key factor that enabled Jesus to be faithful and overcome His temptation (and I mean for us to think beyond the fact that He was divine)? What struggles do you have with sin and temptation that you need to surrender to the Holy Spirit?
Friday: Read Matt 4:23-5:48
Note that Matt 4:23 and 9:35 are virtually identical statements. This is what is known as an inclusio. In an ancient work, an author would use an inclusio (an identical or near-identical phrase at the beginning and the end of a section or the whole work) in order to frame a section: i.e, it marks the beginning and the end of the section/book. This allows the hearers of the text to know what the subject of a section is and when the author is transitioning to a new subject.
The importance of this inclusio cannot be understated: the boundary is 4:23-9:35. The reason for noting this is that Matt 5-7 is often singled out as the famed “Sermon on the Mount.” But Matthew tells us that 8:1-9:35 must be included in our discussion of the Sermon on the Mount—the section does not end in 7:29.
A simple way to summarize this section is that in Matt 5-7 Jesus tells us about the kingdom of God, and 8:1-9:35 He shows what the kingdom of God looks like. Thus, the miracles of Jesus are just as important to understanding the kingdom of God as the teachings of Jesus are.
We know that 5:1-7:29 (Sermon on the Mount) is on the topic of the kingdom by examining the beatitudes (5:3-9). Note they begin and end with a promise that “theirs is the kingdom of God”—an inclusio.
A summary of this Sermon might be that Jesus tells us what kingdom people look like—they are poor in spirit and merciful—and what kingdom people do—they hunger and thirst for God’s justice—and as a result, they are persecuted.
Note that the beatitudes are paired in groups of 3/2. The first 3 bestow a blessing on the humility of the poor. The next 3 grant a blessing to those who pursue justice. And the final 2 extend blessing to those who create peace.
(The “9th beatitude” is applied specifically to the disciples—note “you”—and is a supplement to the other eight).
In the sermon, Jesus does not abolish the Law (5:17), but He does intensify it. For Jesus, it is not merely murder or adultery that is the problem, it is the heart that creates the situation that leads to murder and adultery.
The question becomes, then, how are we able to do this? If not murdering is hard enough, then how are we supposed to not have “hatred” in our hearts? The answer is: we must “ask, seek, and knock” (7:7). Then, He will provide the Spirit. As long as we rely on the Spirit and “seek first His kingdom and His righteousness” (6:33), He will strengthen us. As Paul says, we can do “all things through Christ Jesus who strengthens us” (Phil 4:13).
For a deeper dive into the sermon on the Mount see:
My YouTube presentations (4-5 hours)
See Glen Stasson, Living the Sermon on the Mount
Questions to ponder/discuss: Memorize the beatitudes and reflect on them regularly Practice the Lord’s prayer daily
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
[2] Note that Matthew uses “kingdom of heaven”, while Mark and Luke prefer the kingdom of God. One explanation for this is that a good Jew would not use the Name of God. Thus, they substituted “heaven” for God. After all, heaven is where God’s throne is.
A devotional guide to the Gospel of Matthew [1]
Week 1
Monday: Read Matt 1:1-25
The second word in the Greek text of Matt 1:1 is the word geneseos, which might be woodenly taken as “Genesis.” The word is used as a title for the book of Genesis (Gen 2:4; 5:1). This suggests that 1:1 is likely a title for the Gospel of Matthew and not just the intro to the genealogy that follows. A good translation for Matt 1:1 would be something along the lines of: “the book of the story of Jesus.”
Okay, I know that you are not going to read the genealogy and that you will skip immediately to 1:18 and conclude that today’s reading was quite easy! Well, how about if you go back and note the following things from the genealogy.
First, it should be read in three parts—which many translations recognize by putting paragraph breaks before verse 2, in the middle of verse 6, and before verse 12. We know that this is how the genealogy breaks down because Matthew tells us in 1:17.
Also, note that it has 14 generations in each section. Furthermore, each of the three sections are arranged in accord with major epochs of Israelites history (Abraham and the establishment of the Jewish people; to David and the Monarchy; then to the exile). Jesus is the point in which the history of Israel has reached its climax!
NB: the determinetruth podcast on Feb 8, 2022, will highlight all of this and provide more insights into the significance of all this.
Finally, note the presence of women in the genealogy! That should strike us as odd.
Matthew, then, is tying the story of Jesus to the larger story of Israel: from Abraham to David to the exile to Jesus. (There is even more to it than this; so check out the podcast for more details).
This means that when the angel declares to Joseph that, “He will save His people from their sins” (1:21), we should not read this in light of our western, individualism. That is, it is not talking about our personal sins that lead us to separation from God. It is addressing the sins that led the people of Israel into exile from the land.
Matthew’s introduction makes it clear: salvation is coming to Israel! Jesus has come to bring the exile to an end and to establish the long-awaited kingdom of God.
Questions to ponder/discuss: Look through the genealogy and note the prominence of women in the genealogy. Why do you suppose that Matthew went out of his way to include these women? Did you notice that four of the women in the genealogy were gentiles (non-Jews)? What might be the significance of this? (hint: think “kingdom of God”)
NB: I will be speaking at this zoom conference on Feb 11 & 12. Click here to register for this FREE event.
Tuesday: Read Matt 2:1-23: Hosea 11:1-12
Matthew 1:18-2:23 is an interesting text for the discussion of biblical interpretation. The reason is that in this section Matthew provides five fulfillment passages. In these fulfillment passages, a significant event in the life of the people of Israel is recast in terms of the Jesus story—as though the OT story was a “prophecy” about Jesus.
Most intriguing is the flight of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus to Egypt (1:13-15). One of the difficulties that arise here is that Matthew says, “that the prophet might be fulfilled” (1:15). Matthew, however, cites Hosea 11:1 as the “prophecy” that is being fulfilled. The problem (at least for us it appears to be a problem—though it is important to note that Matthew clearly did not think that this was a problem) is that Hos 11:1 is not a prophecy. It is a historical reminiscence. It is a reminder of when God brought His people out of Egypt.
Another difficulty with this verse is that Matthew appears to use Hos 11:1 to describe Jesus’ family leaving Judea and going to Egypt (this is of course highly disputed in the scholarly world). But the “prophecy” in Hos 11:1 relates to the Israelites leaving (or going “from”) Egypt.
Another example of the oddity of Matthew’s “fulfillment” passages is in 2:23. Here Matt says, “This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophets: ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” Note that Matthew says, “the prophets” (plural). This is a clue that something is going on. The “problem”—at least for us—is that there is no prophecy in the OT that says this.
How might we reconcile all this? I think the answer is simple: Matthew (and all the NT writers are doing this) is reading the entire story of the OT (from Abraham to the exile) as fulfilled in Jesus! It is not a particular verse here or there. It is the whole story. And it is about Jesus.
NB: we will address this on the determinetruth podcast on Feb 15, 2022.
Therefore, Matthew can apply Hos 11:1 to Jesus. It is as if Matthew is saying, “what God did for Israel, He did for Jesus. Or to say it another way, If Jesus is Israel (embodying the people of God), then what happened to them may be applied to Jesus. In fact, as we will continue to note as we proceed through Matthew, the story of Jesus is the story of Israel being retold through the lens of the One through whom the fulfillment came!
This means that we too must learn to read the OT through the lens of Jesus. Of course, this doesn’t mean that we do not also continue to read the OT in light of its own context and story.
NB: we will note, however, when we get to the study of John, that the fulfillment of the story does not stop at Jesus! The story continues through the people of God (us) today. Without this understanding, we would be missing the significance of the NT story and message for the church today.
Questions to ponder/discuss: The killing of the innocent in 2:16-18 reminds us of another king/ruler that killed the innocent children of Israel. Any recollections?
(hint: for you older folks: think Charlton Heston: for you younger folks: google Charlton Heston) What does reading the story of Jesus as the fulfillment of the story of Israel mean for us today?
Wednesday: Read Matt 3:1-17
In case we were not convinced that the story of Jesus is about the coming of the kingdom of God, we need to look no further than John the Baptist’s affirmation, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (3:2).[2] Since the coming of the kingdom of God includes the “forgiveness of sins” (1:21), it only stands to reason that one must “repent” to enter.
The significance of “repent” for the story of Jesus and the kingdom is profound. If this is the only pre-requisite for entering the kingdom of God, then it means that anyone can gain membership into the kingdom of God—provided that they repent! This is why the “good news” is good news to the poor, the widow, the leper, and the tax collector. Such persons were considered “outsiders” by the ruling elite in Jerusalem. Jesus says that entrance is for all—including them! (We will see the significance of this for the Roman world in the Gospel of Luke).
This is why John the Baptist rails against those who considered themselves exempt from repentance (Pharisees and the religious elite) because they considered themselves as already being the children of Abraham (3:9).
We should also note that repentance cannot be mere words. Nor does repentance stop when the prayer is over. John urges, “bear fruit in keeping with repentance” (3:8). Repentance acknowledges that Jesus is Lord and that His kingdom is just. Then, genuine repentance lives as though this is indeed true.
Finally, note that the “good news” is not all good news. John the Baptist goes on to explain that the evidence that the kingdom of God is at hand is that, “The axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (3:10). Those who fail to repent, those who rely on their lineage, or any other alleged credential, will be cut down.
Questions to ponder/discuss: Repentance is not merely acknowledging that Jesus is Lord. Perhaps you have already done that. It includes living it out daily. This means that repentance is an ongoing activity and that the fruit of repentance is reflected in our daily living. What do you need help repenting for and living in accordance with? Ask the Lord for help. Also, find a trusted friend that you will pray for you, encourage you, and keep you accountable in this area.
Thursday: Read Matt 4:1-22: See: Deut 8:3; 6:16; 6:13
After His baptism, Jesus is led by the Holy Spirit to the wilderness (4:1). Lest we think that this is a sweet story of God leading His people as a shepherd leads his flock, we would do well to recognize that the wilderness is a place of trial and testing. Yep, the Holy Spirit is leading Jesus into a war zone. And the enemy, the arch-villain himself, the Satan is awaiting Him there!
The point of the story is that Jesus is facing the same temptations to which Israel succumbed when they journeyed in the wilderness. The only difference is that Jesus succeeds where Israel failed.
Note that each of Jesus’ responses to the devil corresponds to Moses’ response to Israel’s failures in the wilderness (Deut 8:3; 6:16; 6:13). In each case, the text indicates how Israel should have responded to their temptations but did not. But we need not fear, for Jesus was faithful. As a result, the new people of God have been established.
Questions to ponder/discuss: What do you think was a key factor that enabled Jesus to be faithful and overcome His temptation (and I mean for us to think beyond the fact that He was divine)? What struggles do you have with sin and temptation that you need to surrender to the Holy Spirit?
Friday: Read Matt 4:23-5:48
Note that Matt 4:23 and 9:35 are virtually identical statements. This is what is known as an inclusio. In an ancient work, an author would use an inclusio (an identical or near-identical phrase at the beginning and the end of a section or the whole work) in order to frame a section: i.e, it marks the beginning and the end of the section/book. This allows the hearers of the text to know what the subject of a section is and when the author is transitioning to a new subject.
The importance of this inclusio cannot be understated: the boundary is 4:23-9:35. The reason for noting this is that Matt 5-7 is often singled out as the famed “Sermon on the Mount.” But Matthew tells us that 8:1-9:35 must be included in our discussion of the Sermon on the Mount—the section does not end in 7:29.
A simple way to summarize this section is that in Matt 5-7 Jesus tells us about the kingdom of God, and 8:1-9:35 He shows what the kingdom of God looks like. Thus, the miracles of Jesus are just as important to understanding the kingdom of God as the teachings of Jesus are.
We know that 5:1-7:29 (Sermon on the Mount) is on the topic of the kingdom by examining the beatitudes (5:3-9). Note they begin and end with a promise that “theirs is the kingdom of God”—an inclusio.
A summary of this Sermon might be that Jesus tells us what kingdom people look like—they are poor in spirit and merciful—and what kingdom people do—they hunger and thirst for God’s justice—and as a result, they are persecuted.
Note that the beatitudes are paired in groups of 3/2. The first 3 bestow a blessing on the humility of the poor. The next 3 grant a blessing to those who pursue justice. And the final 2 extend blessing to those who create peace.
(The “9th beatitude” is applied specifically to the disciples—note “you”—and is a supplement to the other eight).
In the sermon, Jesus does not abolish the Law (5:17), but He does intensify it. For Jesus, it is not merely murder or adultery that is the problem, it is the heart that creates the situation that leads to murder and adultery.
The question becomes, then, how are we able to do this? If not murdering is hard enough, then how are we supposed to not have “hatred” in our hearts? The answer is: we must “ask, seek, and knock” (7:7). Then, He will provide the Spirit. As long as we rely on the Spirit and “seek first His kingdom and His righteousness” (6:33), He will strengthen us. As Paul says, we can do “all things through Christ Jesus who strengthens us” (Phil 4:13).
For a deeper dive into the sermon on the Mount see:
My YouTube presentations (4-5 hours)
See Glen Stasson, Living the Sermon on the Mount
Questions to ponder/discuss: Memorize the beatitudes and reflect on them regularly Practice the Lord’s prayer daily
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
[2] Note that Matthew uses “kingdom of heaven”, while Mark and Luke prefer the kingdom of God. One explanation for this is that a good Jew would not use the Name of God. Thus, they substituted “heaven” for God. After all, heaven is where God’s throne is.
Matthew Devotional Guide #3 Matthew 11-15
JANUARY 25, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
NB: apologies for those who read this blog regularly. This post is essentially the same as last week’s. Somehow it was reduplicated. A new post will be posted next Tues. User error I’m sure!
Evangelical Christianity is one of the most popular types of Christianity in the American landscape. Statistics vary as to how many American Christians identify as evangelicals but it is a significant number.
Evangelical Christianity is neither a religion nor a denomination. Instead, it is a faith movement that has grown in importance in the United States over the last five decades.
What makes an evangelical?
Most people do not realize that self-identified evangelicals reside on both sides of the political aisle. Evangelicals attend are sorts of churches: there are evangelical Lutherans and evangelical Presbyterians; there are evangelical Southern Baptist and non-denominational, mega-church evangelicals.[1]
The most widely recognized definition of “evangelical” is that of historian David Bebbington. According to Bebbington, there are four fundamental beliefs that unite all evangelicals.
It is the conviction that all persons must personally believe in the Gospel that gave rise to the label “evangelical,” which comes from the Greek word “euangelion” (“good news” or “gospel”).
When did evangelicalism begin?
Evangelicalism could only have arisen after the Protestant Reformation (1500’s). This is because the exalted belief in the Bible as the sole basis for one’s beliefs and practices, which was a central pillar in the formation of Protestantism, along with the conviction that every person needs to make a personal confession of Christ in order to be saved, were distinctives of the burgeoning protestant movement that were not shared by Catholicism.[2] Once these distinctives were in place, the field was set for the formation of what became known as evangelicalism.
The rise of modern evangelicalism is largely due to the influence of Billy Graham.[3] The publication Christianity Today, which was formed by Graham in 1956, served as a media arm of the new movement. Academic institutions such as Wheaton College and Fuller Seminary served as training grounds for the new evangelicals.
If we were to ask evangelicals, and even non-evangelicals, today, “what is the defining issue of evangelicalism?” I suspect that most would respond, “abortion.”
But, did you know that abortion was not the defining issue of evangelicals in the 1960s and ’70s?[4] In fact, it was not the leading issue among evangelicals for the several years after Roe v Wade.[5] In the 1950s-70s, the evangelical movement formed around the issue of segregation[6] (see my previous post).
One of the primary battlegrounds for segregation in the 1950s and ’60s was education. Some White parents feared the prospect of their White girls attending schools with Black boys and eventually growing up, falling in love, and having “brown babies.” Thus, the response to the government’s demands to integrate the schools was the formation of private Christian schools: aka “segregation academies.” And many of those within evangelicalism supported this cause.
In the 1980s-90s evangelicalism coalesced even further around politics with the formation of the Moral Majority.
Living in the wake of evangelicalism: where have all the young people gone?
One might ask why I have written this brief introduction on evangelicalism in the midst of a series on the Church. My answer is that one must recognize the serious impact that evangelicalism has had on contemporary western Christianity.
Many Christians under 40[7] who have grown up in an evangelical church have become quite disillusioned. A good number of them are leaving evangelicalism, many are leaving the Church, and a fair number are leaving their faith.
This crisis is often not evident to older Christians who remain faithful members of their churches. They might assume that the younger folks have left to find churches that are “more relevant” for them. These older Christians often have no idea that “relevant” means to the younger generation of Christians a rejection of much of what they were taught in their youth. Nor do many of the older Christians understand that some of these younger people no longer choose to identify as Christians!
NB: I will be speaking at this zoom conference on Feb 11 & 12. Click here to register for this FREE event.
Why? Why have they left?
As much as I wish to give an answer, I would first encourage you to go ask them. The conversation might be good for them. It will certainly be good for you.
I would urge you to be prepared. And when they share with you why they left and that they believe much of what they were taught in our churches when they were younger is fraudulent, don’t be defensive. Just listen. You may want to apologize.
As far as the research on why they have left, Elizabeth Dreschers’ book, Choosing Our Religion, states it pretty plainly. She notes that young people who are leaving “tended to express anger and frustration with both the teachings and practices of their childhood church.”
Like what? You might ask. Before I provide a list of some of the teachings and practices, I should note that you’re probably not going to like the list. Also, the point is not whether we are right or not. The point is that these are some of the reasons why young people are leaving evangelicalism and in some instances why they are leaving Christianity.
To name a few:
For the sake of space, allow me to list other topics that are of great significance to the younger generations.
There are certainly more items on the list, but I hope you get the point.
What is far worse than evangelical views on these issues is the lack of love evangelicals have shown to those who disagree. You may or may not like some or all of these issues, but we are still called to love those who do.
“By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
The next generation looks at statements like this and concludes that many evangelicals must not be disciples of Jesus.
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] There is a chart of 40 “evangelical” churches and their interrelationships available on the National Assocation of Evangelicals website https://v2ieg1eiji227cna43m44rey-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/NAE-Denominational-Network-Diagram.pdf. There are “evangelical” churches that are not included in this chart, but nonetheless it gives a good representation of the diversity and distinctives of evangelicalism.
[2] This is not to say that Catholics do not or cannot believe in such. It is simply to state that such beliefs were not a distinctive part of Catholicism and were not widely held.
[3] I am not interested in presenting a thorough history of evangelicalism. Many claim that it formally arose in the early 1900’s after some began to break from the Fundamentalist movement.
[4] See: Daniel Williams, Defenders of the Unborn, Oxford University Press; Reprint Edition (December 4, 2015).
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/christian-right-discovered-abortion-rights-transformed-culture-wars/. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[5] Abortion did not become the defining issue for American evangelicals until 1980. Prior to the 1980’s abortion was viewed by many evangelicals as a “Catholic” issue. Because evangelicals were often anti-Catholic, this meant that most evangelicals prior to 1980 were pro-abortion.
[6] See https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/02/05/race-not-abortion-was-founding-issue-religious-right/A5rnmClvuAU7EaThaNLAnK/story.html. Last accessed 9-7-20. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[7] Certainly, there are a number who are over 40 as well.
NB: apologies for those who read this blog regularly. This post is essentially the same as last week’s. Somehow it was reduplicated. A new post will be posted next Tues. User error I’m sure!
Evangelical Christianity is one of the most popular types of Christianity in the American landscape. Statistics vary as to how many American Christians identify as evangelicals but it is a significant number.
Evangelical Christianity is neither a religion nor a denomination. Instead, it is a faith movement that has grown in importance in the United States over the last five decades.
What makes an evangelical?
Most people do not realize that self-identified evangelicals reside on both sides of the political aisle. Evangelicals attend are sorts of churches: there are evangelical Lutherans and evangelical Presbyterians; there are evangelical Southern Baptist and non-denominational, mega-church evangelicals.[1]
The most widely recognized definition of “evangelical” is that of historian David Bebbington. According to Bebbington, there are four fundamental beliefs that unite all evangelicals.
- Biblicism: having a high regard for the Bible and a conviction that it contains all the spiritual truths needed for Christians.
- Cross-centered: a strong conviction of the Cross of Christ and its atoning significance for our salvation.
- Conversion: that individuals need to have a personal trust in the cross of Christ for their salvation.
- Activism: that all Christians are called to proclaim the gospel to everyone.
It is the conviction that all persons must personally believe in the Gospel that gave rise to the label “evangelical,” which comes from the Greek word “euangelion” (“good news” or “gospel”).
When did evangelicalism begin?
Evangelicalism could only have arisen after the Protestant Reformation (1500’s). This is because the exalted belief in the Bible as the sole basis for one’s beliefs and practices, which was a central pillar in the formation of Protestantism, along with the conviction that every person needs to make a personal confession of Christ in order to be saved, were distinctives of the burgeoning protestant movement that were not shared by Catholicism.[2] Once these distinctives were in place, the field was set for the formation of what became known as evangelicalism.
The rise of modern evangelicalism is largely due to the influence of Billy Graham.[3] The publication Christianity Today, which was formed by Graham in 1956, served as a media arm of the new movement. Academic institutions such as Wheaton College and Fuller Seminary served as training grounds for the new evangelicals.
If we were to ask evangelicals, and even non-evangelicals, today, “what is the defining issue of evangelicalism?” I suspect that most would respond, “abortion.”
But, did you know that abortion was not the defining issue of evangelicals in the 1960s and ’70s?[4] In fact, it was not the leading issue among evangelicals for the several years after Roe v Wade.[5] In the 1950s-70s, the evangelical movement formed around the issue of segregation[6] (see my previous post).
One of the primary battlegrounds for segregation in the 1950s and ’60s was education. Some White parents feared the prospect of their White girls attending schools with Black boys and eventually growing up, falling in love, and having “brown babies.” Thus, the response to the government’s demands to integrate the schools was the formation of private Christian schools: aka “segregation academies.” And many of those within evangelicalism supported this cause.
In the 1980s-90s evangelicalism coalesced even further around politics with the formation of the Moral Majority.
Living in the wake of evangelicalism: where have all the young people gone?
One might ask why I have written this brief introduction on evangelicalism in the midst of a series on the Church. My answer is that one must recognize the serious impact that evangelicalism has had on contemporary western Christianity.
Many Christians under 40[7] who have grown up in an evangelical church have become quite disillusioned. A good number of them are leaving evangelicalism, many are leaving the Church, and a fair number are leaving their faith.
This crisis is often not evident to older Christians who remain faithful members of their churches. They might assume that the younger folks have left to find churches that are “more relevant” for them. These older Christians often have no idea that “relevant” means to the younger generation of Christians a rejection of much of what they were taught in their youth. Nor do many of the older Christians understand that some of these younger people no longer choose to identify as Christians!
NB: I will be speaking at this zoom conference on Feb 11 & 12. Click here to register for this FREE event.
Why? Why have they left?
As much as I wish to give an answer, I would first encourage you to go ask them. The conversation might be good for them. It will certainly be good for you.
I would urge you to be prepared. And when they share with you why they left and that they believe much of what they were taught in our churches when they were younger is fraudulent, don’t be defensive. Just listen. You may want to apologize.
As far as the research on why they have left, Elizabeth Dreschers’ book, Choosing Our Religion, states it pretty plainly. She notes that young people who are leaving “tended to express anger and frustration with both the teachings and practices of their childhood church.”
Like what? You might ask. Before I provide a list of some of the teachings and practices, I should note that you’re probably not going to like the list. Also, the point is not whether we are right or not. The point is that these are some of the reasons why young people are leaving evangelicalism and in some instances why they are leaving Christianity.
To name a few:
- Politics—specifically, that many evangelicals are wed to one party and are not willing or even able to critique it fairly.
- Global warming: older people may or may not care about global warming and they may or may not believe in the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting it, but young people do. They, after all, are the ones who are planning on living on this planet for the next half-century or more and their kids may well live into the next century. Older evangelicals’ lack of concern for global warming is considered as a lack of love for the next generation who have to face the devastating effects of global warming. We will be dead, or pretty close to it.
- Immigration: for a religious ideology that expresses love for one’s enemies, young people cannot understand the fear and lack of concern for those fleeing devastation and injustice. The notion that we need to stay safe in our country and protect our citizens expresses self-interest and not a sacrificial love for the other.
- Poverty alleviation Evangelicalism’s stress on the individual has contributed to a lack of concern for poverty alleviation.
For the sake of space, allow me to list other topics that are of great significance to the younger generations.
- Women’s rights
- Abortion
- LGBTQ+
- Justification of war; militarism
- Racism
- Nationalism
- White nationalism
- Narrow-mindedness; judgmentalism
- Zionism and Islamaphobia
- Gun violence
- Anti-science: anti-evolution
There are certainly more items on the list, but I hope you get the point.
What is far worse than evangelical views on these issues is the lack of love evangelicals have shown to those who disagree. You may or may not like some or all of these issues, but we are still called to love those who do.
“By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
The next generation looks at statements like this and concludes that many evangelicals must not be disciples of Jesus.
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] There is a chart of 40 “evangelical” churches and their interrelationships available on the National Assocation of Evangelicals website https://v2ieg1eiji227cna43m44rey-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/NAE-Denominational-Network-Diagram.pdf. There are “evangelical” churches that are not included in this chart, but nonetheless it gives a good representation of the diversity and distinctives of evangelicalism.
[2] This is not to say that Catholics do not or cannot believe in such. It is simply to state that such beliefs were not a distinctive part of Catholicism and were not widely held.
[3] I am not interested in presenting a thorough history of evangelicalism. Many claim that it formally arose in the early 1900’s after some began to break from the Fundamentalist movement.
[4] See: Daniel Williams, Defenders of the Unborn, Oxford University Press; Reprint Edition (December 4, 2015).
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/christian-right-discovered-abortion-rights-transformed-culture-wars/. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[5] Abortion did not become the defining issue for American evangelicals until 1980. Prior to the 1980’s abortion was viewed by many evangelicals as a “Catholic” issue. Because evangelicals were often anti-Catholic, this meant that most evangelicals prior to 1980 were pro-abortion.
[6] See https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/02/05/race-not-abortion-was-founding-issue-religious-right/A5rnmClvuAU7EaThaNLAnK/story.html. Last accessed 9-7-20. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[7] Certainly, there are a number who are over 40 as well.
Mark week #4 Devotional Guide
JANUARY 21, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
Monday: Read 12:41-14:9
The larger context for Mark 12:41-14:9 includes the fact that Jesus entered Jerusalem and the temple and He found no fruit (11:11-14). As a result, He pronounces a coming judgment on the Temple by overturning the tables in the temple courts (11:15-18).
The episode of the woman giving her two “copper coins” (note Mark always translates Judean language for his Roman readers: thus, he says, “which amount to a cent”; 42) has been widely misunderstood. Jesus is not heralding the woman as a hero. He is not addressing her at all. Instead, He is rebuking the religious leaders for making her give. After all, she gave “all she had to live on” (44). This means that she didn’t have enough left over to buy a loaf of bread! And they were mandating that she give: even though those who benefitted from her offering had plenty to live on! Jesus could not have been happy about this. Just prior to this account, He told His disciples, “Beware of the scribes . . . who devour widows’ houses” (38, 40). Surely the story of this woman illustrates them doing just that!
This sets the context for the famed “Olivet Discourse” (13:1-37). In this speech, Jesus reiterates that the temple will be destroyed (13:1-2). The disciples then ask, “when will these things be?” (13:3). Jesus’ speech is a response to this question and primarily addresses the signs that will accompany the impending destruction of the Temple (which occurred in AD 70). As for Jesus’ return, which the disciples had no clue what that meant, Jesus says that He doesn’t know when it will occur (32). The speech concludes in 13:33-37. Note that these verses are framed with “keep on the alert” (33, 37).
I intentionally included the woman giving at the temple (12:41-44) and woman anointing Jesus 14:3-9 with our reading of 13:1-37. It is conceivable that the two accounts of women serve as the outer part (the bread) of a Marcan sandwich—with chapter 13 as the center (the peanut butter and jelly). There are numerous parallels between the accounts of the two women: in both accounts the gift is specified (2 coins; 300 denarii); both use the word “poor” (12:42-43; 14:5, 7). And both are stories of women worshiping at the temple: i.e., the woman who anoints Jesus is worshiping at the new Temple! In the middle is Jesus’ speech on the coming destruction of the Jerusalem temple.
For a detailed discussion of Mark 13 and the end-times see my Understanding the New Testament and the End Times, chapter 10.
For a somewhat different viewpoint than mine, see Alexander Stewart Jesus and the Future, part 1.
Questions to ponder/discuss: What evidence do you see in 13:1-37 that supports the view that most of this chapter relates to events that occurred at the time of the disciples? Note Jesus’ commands to the disciples. How many can you find? What do you think “keep watch” means? (We will address this question again in our study of Matt 25). What do you think worshiping Jesus as the new temple looks like today?
Tuesday: Read 14:10-52
Yet again we stumble upon a Marcan sandwich (1-11). The sandwich begins with yesterday’s reading and the conspiracy to kill Jesus (1-2). It closes with Judas’ agreement to betray Jesus leading to His death (10-11). In the middle is the woman’s anointing Jesus in preparation for His burial (3-9).
Judas’ agreement to betray Jesus (10-11), then, forms the beginning of another sandwich. This sandwich ends with reference to one of the disciples betraying Jesus (17-21). In the center the disciples prepare for the Passover meal (12-16).
But this is not the end of Mark’s sandwiches. Jesus’ informing the disciples that one of them would betray Him (17-21) begins another. This sandwich closes with Jesus’ warning that they will all fall away (27-31). In the middle is the Last Supper (22-26). In this sandwich, one of the disciples betrays Him, they all fall away, yet Jesus remains faithful unto death. The self-sacrifice of Jesus contrasts with the betrayal of the disciples.
The Last Supper must be understood as a meal in which Jesus reconstitutes the new Israel: hence, “this is My blood of the Covenant” (24; cf Jer 31:31-34). The present passage has echoes of the Israelites leaving Egypt. The importance of this is the awareness that what follows for them (and us) is an experience in the wilderness. Leaving Egypt will not be easy, and neither will be the wilderness experience that awaits them/us. Thus, Jesus repeatedly instructs his disciples to “keep watch” through the night (34, 37, 38). Even Jesus prays that the hour might “pass Him by” (35).
For further reading see Perrin, Nicholas, Jesus the Priest
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Wednesday: Read 14:53-15:15
Perhaps the most significant sandwich occurs in the trial scene. First, Peter enters the home of the High Priest (53-54). In the center is Jesus before the Sanhedrin (55-65). The scene ends with Peter’s denials (66-72). Jesus’ faithfulness contrasts Peter’s weakness.
The trail scene is significant as it testifies that Jesus was indeed making assertions regarding the Temple. Even though they could not find a consistent testimony (59), we know that their basic charge was correct: Jesus indeed claimed to be the true temple (John 2:19-21).
The release of Barabbas certainly contrasts Jesus’ death. The contrast is evident first in that there is no way that the man’s name was “Barabbas” (lit., “a son of a father”). No person would be named this. It is quite likely that the disciples gave him this nickname in their later retelling of the story. There is some evidence that suggests that Barabbas’ real name was “Jesus.” It is possible, then, that the early Christians gave him the nickname Barabbas as a way of contrasting “Jesus, barabbas’: (Jesus, a son of a Father) with “Jesus, barabba” (Jesus, the Son of the Father). Regardless, the irony is deep: a convicted murderer is set free, while an innocent man is killed.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Thursday: Read 15:16-39
Biblical scholar Michael Bird pointed out that Mark’s Gospel narrates Jesus’ crucifixion as a parody of the Roman triumph. A Roman triumph is a formal ceremony in Rome that occurs after a successful military campaign. The conquering general would first be arrayed in a purple robe (17). Then they would place a laurel wreath on his head (17). The general would then march into Rome with his two sons or two generals traveling next to him (27). They would then offer the victorious general a drink, which he would refuse (23). When the procession ended the victorious general would be proclaimed, the “son of Jupiter.” Jesus, of course, is proclaimed the Son of God” (39). If Mark is mimicking the Roman triumph, then surely he is setting forth Christ as the world’s true King.
As we noted earlier, the Gospel of Mark begins with Mark’s claim that Jesus is “the Son of God” (1:1). This statement had significant political overtones. After all, only Caesar was “a son of the gods.” The fact that the Gospel of Mark closes with a Roman centurion confessing Jesus: “truly this man was the Son of God” (39),[2] highlights the political nature of Jesus’ claim. Jesus is the King! Caesar is not!
Listen to/meditate on the lyrics to “This is how love wins” by Steven Curtis Chapman.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Friday 15:40-16:8 (9-20)
The section begins (40-41) by referring to a group of women who were watching from a distance. These women, as it turns out, used to “follow Him” (41). Of course, to “follow” Jesus is a key indicator in the Gospel of Mark of being a disciple (Mark 8:34). Mark also notes that they used to “serve Him” (my translation. The NAS, ESV, and NKJ say, “minister(ed)”; other translations say, “cared for His needs”: NIV; and “give Him support”: NET). The word used here is the verbal form of the word for “deacon.” It means to “serve” or “care for” (lit. “to wait on tables”). Certainly, the role of “deacon” does not exist yet. Nonetheless, the women are given a very high status by Mark. They were certainly disciples of Jesus and their “serving” Him models later Christian activity (This contrasts the way men and the disciples are portrayed in the Gospel of Mark).
This final section in the Gospel of Mark contains another sandwich. The account begins with reference to the women (40-41). Then Mark depicts Joseph’s burying of Jesus—an act that surely meant he would no longer be permitted to retain his status within the Jewish high council (42-46). Mark, then, returns to note that some of the women were watching the burial (47). Who are the faithful disciples?
The Gospel of Mark ends with an account of the women at the tomb on Sunday morning. An angel announces that Jesus has risen and they are to, “go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you’” (15:7). That the Gospel ends with the women seemingly not obeying the command or of any description of Jesus appearing to the disciples in Galilee, suggests that Mark 15:8 is not the true end of the Gospel.
It is highly likely that the ending of Mark which we have in our modern Bibles (15:9-20), though certainly old, is not the correct ending. All we can assume is that the real ending was lost. Fortunately, we have Matthew, Luke, John, and even Paul to help us fill in the details.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
[2] Of course, one might suggest that the centurion meant by this that Jesus was “a son of the gods.”
Monday: Read 12:41-14:9
The larger context for Mark 12:41-14:9 includes the fact that Jesus entered Jerusalem and the temple and He found no fruit (11:11-14). As a result, He pronounces a coming judgment on the Temple by overturning the tables in the temple courts (11:15-18).
The episode of the woman giving her two “copper coins” (note Mark always translates Judean language for his Roman readers: thus, he says, “which amount to a cent”; 42) has been widely misunderstood. Jesus is not heralding the woman as a hero. He is not addressing her at all. Instead, He is rebuking the religious leaders for making her give. After all, she gave “all she had to live on” (44). This means that she didn’t have enough left over to buy a loaf of bread! And they were mandating that she give: even though those who benefitted from her offering had plenty to live on! Jesus could not have been happy about this. Just prior to this account, He told His disciples, “Beware of the scribes . . . who devour widows’ houses” (38, 40). Surely the story of this woman illustrates them doing just that!
This sets the context for the famed “Olivet Discourse” (13:1-37). In this speech, Jesus reiterates that the temple will be destroyed (13:1-2). The disciples then ask, “when will these things be?” (13:3). Jesus’ speech is a response to this question and primarily addresses the signs that will accompany the impending destruction of the Temple (which occurred in AD 70). As for Jesus’ return, which the disciples had no clue what that meant, Jesus says that He doesn’t know when it will occur (32). The speech concludes in 13:33-37. Note that these verses are framed with “keep on the alert” (33, 37).
I intentionally included the woman giving at the temple (12:41-44) and woman anointing Jesus 14:3-9 with our reading of 13:1-37. It is conceivable that the two accounts of women serve as the outer part (the bread) of a Marcan sandwich—with chapter 13 as the center (the peanut butter and jelly). There are numerous parallels between the accounts of the two women: in both accounts the gift is specified (2 coins; 300 denarii); both use the word “poor” (12:42-43; 14:5, 7). And both are stories of women worshiping at the temple: i.e., the woman who anoints Jesus is worshiping at the new Temple! In the middle is Jesus’ speech on the coming destruction of the Jerusalem temple.
For a detailed discussion of Mark 13 and the end-times see my Understanding the New Testament and the End Times, chapter 10.
For a somewhat different viewpoint than mine, see Alexander Stewart Jesus and the Future, part 1.
Questions to ponder/discuss: What evidence do you see in 13:1-37 that supports the view that most of this chapter relates to events that occurred at the time of the disciples? Note Jesus’ commands to the disciples. How many can you find? What do you think “keep watch” means? (We will address this question again in our study of Matt 25). What do you think worshiping Jesus as the new temple looks like today?
Tuesday: Read 14:10-52
Yet again we stumble upon a Marcan sandwich (1-11). The sandwich begins with yesterday’s reading and the conspiracy to kill Jesus (1-2). It closes with Judas’ agreement to betray Jesus leading to His death (10-11). In the middle is the woman’s anointing Jesus in preparation for His burial (3-9).
Judas’ agreement to betray Jesus (10-11), then, forms the beginning of another sandwich. This sandwich ends with reference to one of the disciples betraying Jesus (17-21). In the center the disciples prepare for the Passover meal (12-16).
But this is not the end of Mark’s sandwiches. Jesus’ informing the disciples that one of them would betray Him (17-21) begins another. This sandwich closes with Jesus’ warning that they will all fall away (27-31). In the middle is the Last Supper (22-26). In this sandwich, one of the disciples betrays Him, they all fall away, yet Jesus remains faithful unto death. The self-sacrifice of Jesus contrasts with the betrayal of the disciples.
The Last Supper must be understood as a meal in which Jesus reconstitutes the new Israel: hence, “this is My blood of the Covenant” (24; cf Jer 31:31-34). The present passage has echoes of the Israelites leaving Egypt. The importance of this is the awareness that what follows for them (and us) is an experience in the wilderness. Leaving Egypt will not be easy, and neither will be the wilderness experience that awaits them/us. Thus, Jesus repeatedly instructs his disciples to “keep watch” through the night (34, 37, 38). Even Jesus prays that the hour might “pass Him by” (35).
For further reading see Perrin, Nicholas, Jesus the Priest
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- It is easy to read these stories and think “we would have done better than the disciples.” Right?! We would never betray Him for money. We would certainly have faced arrest and death for Him. Think of a time in which you had an opportunity to be faithful to Christ and you didn’t stand firm; then repent and pray that Christ might show you what being faithful to Him might look like each day, and ask for the power of the Spirit to do so.
Wednesday: Read 14:53-15:15
Perhaps the most significant sandwich occurs in the trial scene. First, Peter enters the home of the High Priest (53-54). In the center is Jesus before the Sanhedrin (55-65). The scene ends with Peter’s denials (66-72). Jesus’ faithfulness contrasts Peter’s weakness.
The trail scene is significant as it testifies that Jesus was indeed making assertions regarding the Temple. Even though they could not find a consistent testimony (59), we know that their basic charge was correct: Jesus indeed claimed to be the true temple (John 2:19-21).
The release of Barabbas certainly contrasts Jesus’ death. The contrast is evident first in that there is no way that the man’s name was “Barabbas” (lit., “a son of a father”). No person would be named this. It is quite likely that the disciples gave him this nickname in their later retelling of the story. There is some evidence that suggests that Barabbas’ real name was “Jesus.” It is possible, then, that the early Christians gave him the nickname Barabbas as a way of contrasting “Jesus, barabbas’: (Jesus, a son of a Father) with “Jesus, barabba” (Jesus, the Son of the Father). Regardless, the irony is deep: a convicted murderer is set free, while an innocent man is killed.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- It is easy to look down on Peter as one who denied Jesus: “there goes Peter again.” But the reality is that he is one of the few that even stuck around at all. Why do you suppose Peter lied about knowing Jesus? What might you do to be more prepared so that when the opportunity comes to acknowledge Jesus, you won’t give in and deny Him?
Thursday: Read 15:16-39
Biblical scholar Michael Bird pointed out that Mark’s Gospel narrates Jesus’ crucifixion as a parody of the Roman triumph. A Roman triumph is a formal ceremony in Rome that occurs after a successful military campaign. The conquering general would first be arrayed in a purple robe (17). Then they would place a laurel wreath on his head (17). The general would then march into Rome with his two sons or two generals traveling next to him (27). They would then offer the victorious general a drink, which he would refuse (23). When the procession ended the victorious general would be proclaimed, the “son of Jupiter.” Jesus, of course, is proclaimed the Son of God” (39). If Mark is mimicking the Roman triumph, then surely he is setting forth Christ as the world’s true King.
As we noted earlier, the Gospel of Mark begins with Mark’s claim that Jesus is “the Son of God” (1:1). This statement had significant political overtones. After all, only Caesar was “a son of the gods.” The fact that the Gospel of Mark closes with a Roman centurion confessing Jesus: “truly this man was the Son of God” (39),[2] highlights the political nature of Jesus’ claim. Jesus is the King! Caesar is not!
Listen to/meditate on the lyrics to “This is how love wins” by Steven Curtis Chapman.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- Rom 5:8 says that He died for us while we were His enemies. It is easy to read the crucifixion accounts and think about what “others” (the Sanhedrin, Pilate, the Romans) did to Jesus. But the reality is that we participated too. What is the significance of Jesus’ death for you?
- The death of Jesus is certainly to be viewed as a substitutionary event. Jesus died in our place. It is also the moment of His victory. But it is also a demonstration of what “bearing your cross” looks like. We, too, must carry our crosses. In what area of life do you need Christ’s help to “carry your cross?”
- That Jesus is the true Son of God heralds Him as the true humanity (Adam was the son of God: Luke 3:38). Jesus’ death makes possible our resurrection. How does living in light of the death and resurrection of Christ impact your daily walk with Christ?
Friday 15:40-16:8 (9-20)
The section begins (40-41) by referring to a group of women who were watching from a distance. These women, as it turns out, used to “follow Him” (41). Of course, to “follow” Jesus is a key indicator in the Gospel of Mark of being a disciple (Mark 8:34). Mark also notes that they used to “serve Him” (my translation. The NAS, ESV, and NKJ say, “minister(ed)”; other translations say, “cared for His needs”: NIV; and “give Him support”: NET). The word used here is the verbal form of the word for “deacon.” It means to “serve” or “care for” (lit. “to wait on tables”). Certainly, the role of “deacon” does not exist yet. Nonetheless, the women are given a very high status by Mark. They were certainly disciples of Jesus and their “serving” Him models later Christian activity (This contrasts the way men and the disciples are portrayed in the Gospel of Mark).
This final section in the Gospel of Mark contains another sandwich. The account begins with reference to the women (40-41). Then Mark depicts Joseph’s burying of Jesus—an act that surely meant he would no longer be permitted to retain his status within the Jewish high council (42-46). Mark, then, returns to note that some of the women were watching the burial (47). Who are the faithful disciples?
The Gospel of Mark ends with an account of the women at the tomb on Sunday morning. An angel announces that Jesus has risen and they are to, “go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you’” (15:7). That the Gospel ends with the women seemingly not obeying the command or of any description of Jesus appearing to the disciples in Galilee, suggests that Mark 15:8 is not the true end of the Gospel.
It is highly likely that the ending of Mark which we have in our modern Bibles (15:9-20), though certainly old, is not the correct ending. All we can assume is that the real ending was lost. Fortunately, we have Matthew, Luke, John, and even Paul to help us fill in the details.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- As we will see throughout the NT, the resurrection of Jesus is the central pillar of Christianity (1 Cor 15:3-8). Without it, there is no Christianity. What does belief in Jesus’ resurrection do for your faith in Christ?
- The resurrection of Jesus, who is called the “Firstborn of the dead” (Rev 1:5), is a prelude to our resurrection (and the restoration of the whole of creation, but we will save that conversation for the book of Romans) and reminds us that eternity is not some spiritual, disembodied, heavenly bliss. We will live on the restored earth in bodies of flesh and dwelling in the eternal presence of God—whose “face” we will see (Rev 22:4). How does/should this impact your everyday life in Christ?
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
[2] Of course, one might suggest that the centurion meant by this that Jesus was “a son of the gods.”
Evangelicalism #1: why are so many young people leaving the church and even their faith?
JANUARY 18, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
Evangelical Christianity dominated much of the American Church over the last 50+ years. Statistics vary as to how many American Christians identify as evangelicals but it is a significant number.
Evangelical Christianity is neither a religion nor a denomination. Instead, it is a faith movement that has grown in importance in the United States over the last five decades.
What makes someone an evangelical?
Most people fail to realize that self-identified evangelicals reside on both sides of the political aisle.
Evangelicals attend are sorts of churches: there are evangelical Lutherans and evangelical Presbyterians; there are Southern Baptist evangelicals and non-denominational, mega-church evangelicals.[1]
The most widely recognized definition of “evangelical” is that of historian David Bebbington. According to Bebbington, there are four fundamental beliefs that unite all evangelicals.
The conviction that all persons must believe in the Gospel gave rise to the label “evangelical.” The term itself comes from the Greek word “euangelion” (“good news” or “gospel”).
When did evangelicalism begin?
Evangelicalism could not have arisen without the Protestant break from Catholicism during the time of the Reformation (1500’s). The belief in the Bible as the sole basis for one’s beliefs and practices, which was a central pillar in the formation of Protestantism, along with the conviction that every person needs to make a personal confession of Christ as Lord in order to be saved, contributed significantly to the formation of evangelicalism.
The rise of modern evangelicalism is largely due to the influence of Billy Graham. The publication Christianity Today, which was formed by Graham in 1956, served as a media voice for the burgeoning movement. Academic institutions such as Wheaton College and Fuller Seminary served as training grounds for evangelicals.
If we were to ask, “what is the defining issue of evangelicalism today?” I suspect that most would respond, “abortion.” But, were you aware that abortion was not the defining issue of evangelicals in the 1960s and ’70s?[2] In fact, it was not the leading issue among evangelicals until 1979, six years after Roe v Wade.[3]
Instead, the evangelical movement of the 1950s-70s formed around the issue of segregation.
In the 1980-90s, evangelicalism coalesced even further around politics with the formation of the Moral Majority.
Living in the wake of evangelicalism: where have all the young people gone?
One might ask why I have written this brief introduction on evangelicalism in the midst of a series on the Church? My answer is that we must recognize the serious impact evangelicalism has had on contemporary western Christianity before we can address the state of the Church in the west today.
Many of those who are under 40[5] and have grown up in an evangelical church have become severely disillusioned. A good number of them are leaving evangelicalism, many others are leaving the Church, and a fair number are leaving the faith.
This crisis is often not evident to older Christians who remain faithful members of their churches. They might assume that the younger folks have left to find churches that are “more relevant” for them. Many older Christians often have no idea that “relevant” means to the younger generation of Christians a rejection of much of what they were taught in their youth.
Many older Christians also have no idea that some within the younger generations no longer choose to identify as Christians!
Why have so many young people left?
As much as I wish to give an answer, I would rather encourage you to go ask them. And when they begin to share with you that they believe that much of what they were taught in our churches as youth is fraudulent, don’t be defensive. Just listen to them. You may want to apologize: but that will probably take some time.
Elizabeth Drescher’s book, Choosing Our Religion, claims that the young people who are leaving “tended to express anger and frustration with both the teachings and practices of their childhood church.”
Before I list some of the reasons why young people are leaving I should note that you’re probably not going to like it. Also, whether you or I agree is not the point. The point is that these are some of the reasons why young people are leaving evangelicalism and in many cases why they are leaving Christianity.
To name a few issues:
There is certainly much more but I hope you get the point.
You may or may not like some or all of these issues, but you should love those who do so.
What is far worse than our views on these issues is the lack of love evangelicalism has shown to those who disagree.
“By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
The next generation looks at statements like this and concludes that many evangelicals must not be disciples of Jesus.
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] There is a chart of 40 “evangelical” churches and their interrelationships available on the National Association of Evangelicals website
[2] See Daniel Williams, Defenders of the Unborn, Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (December 4, 2015). https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/christian-right-discovered-abortion-rights-transformed-culture-wars/. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[3] Abortion did not become the defining issue for American evangelicals until 1980. Prior to the 1980s abortion was viewed by many evangelicals as a “Catholic” issue. Because evangelicals were often anti-Catholic, this meant that most evangelicals prior to 1980 were pro-abortion.
[4] See https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/02/05/race-not-abortion-was-founding-issue-religious-right/A5rnmClvuAU7EaThaNLAnK/story.html. Last accessed 9-7-20. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[5] Certainly, there are a number who are over 40 as well.
Evangelical Christianity dominated much of the American Church over the last 50+ years. Statistics vary as to how many American Christians identify as evangelicals but it is a significant number.
Evangelical Christianity is neither a religion nor a denomination. Instead, it is a faith movement that has grown in importance in the United States over the last five decades.
What makes someone an evangelical?
Most people fail to realize that self-identified evangelicals reside on both sides of the political aisle.
Evangelicals attend are sorts of churches: there are evangelical Lutherans and evangelical Presbyterians; there are Southern Baptist evangelicals and non-denominational, mega-church evangelicals.[1]
The most widely recognized definition of “evangelical” is that of historian David Bebbington. According to Bebbington, there are four fundamental beliefs that unite all evangelicals.
- First, biblicism: a high regard for the Bible and a conviction that it contains all the spiritual truths needed for Christians.
- Secondly, cross-centered: a strong conviction of the Cross of Christ and its atoning significance for salvation.
- Thirdly, conversions: the belief that individuals need to have a personal belief in the cross of Christ for their salvation.
- Finally, activism: the belief that Christians are called to proclaim the gospel to all people.
The conviction that all persons must believe in the Gospel gave rise to the label “evangelical.” The term itself comes from the Greek word “euangelion” (“good news” or “gospel”).
When did evangelicalism begin?
Evangelicalism could not have arisen without the Protestant break from Catholicism during the time of the Reformation (1500’s). The belief in the Bible as the sole basis for one’s beliefs and practices, which was a central pillar in the formation of Protestantism, along with the conviction that every person needs to make a personal confession of Christ as Lord in order to be saved, contributed significantly to the formation of evangelicalism.
The rise of modern evangelicalism is largely due to the influence of Billy Graham. The publication Christianity Today, which was formed by Graham in 1956, served as a media voice for the burgeoning movement. Academic institutions such as Wheaton College and Fuller Seminary served as training grounds for evangelicals.
If we were to ask, “what is the defining issue of evangelicalism today?” I suspect that most would respond, “abortion.” But, were you aware that abortion was not the defining issue of evangelicals in the 1960s and ’70s?[2] In fact, it was not the leading issue among evangelicals until 1979, six years after Roe v Wade.[3]
Instead, the evangelical movement of the 1950s-70s formed around the issue of segregation.
In the 1980-90s, evangelicalism coalesced even further around politics with the formation of the Moral Majority.
Living in the wake of evangelicalism: where have all the young people gone?
One might ask why I have written this brief introduction on evangelicalism in the midst of a series on the Church? My answer is that we must recognize the serious impact evangelicalism has had on contemporary western Christianity before we can address the state of the Church in the west today.
Many of those who are under 40[5] and have grown up in an evangelical church have become severely disillusioned. A good number of them are leaving evangelicalism, many others are leaving the Church, and a fair number are leaving the faith.
This crisis is often not evident to older Christians who remain faithful members of their churches. They might assume that the younger folks have left to find churches that are “more relevant” for them. Many older Christians often have no idea that “relevant” means to the younger generation of Christians a rejection of much of what they were taught in their youth.
Many older Christians also have no idea that some within the younger generations no longer choose to identify as Christians!
Why have so many young people left?
As much as I wish to give an answer, I would rather encourage you to go ask them. And when they begin to share with you that they believe that much of what they were taught in our churches as youth is fraudulent, don’t be defensive. Just listen to them. You may want to apologize: but that will probably take some time.
Elizabeth Drescher’s book, Choosing Our Religion, claims that the young people who are leaving “tended to express anger and frustration with both the teachings and practices of their childhood church.”
Before I list some of the reasons why young people are leaving I should note that you’re probably not going to like it. Also, whether you or I agree is not the point. The point is that these are some of the reasons why young people are leaving evangelicalism and in many cases why they are leaving Christianity.
To name a few issues:
- politics—specifically being wed to one party and not being willing or able to critique it.
- global warming: older people may or may not care about global warming and they may or may not believe in the overwhelming scientific evidence, but young people do. They, after all, are the ones who are planning to live on this planet for the next half-century or more and their kids may well live into the next century. Older evangelicals’ lack of concern for global warming is thought of as a lack of love for the next generation.
- Immigration
- Poverty alleviation
- Women’s rights
- Abortion
- LBGTQ+
- Justification of war; militarism
- Racism
- Nationalism
- White nationalism
- Narrow-mindedness; judgmentalism
- Zionism and Islamaphobia
- Gun violence
- Anti-science: anti-evolution
There is certainly much more but I hope you get the point.
You may or may not like some or all of these issues, but you should love those who do so.
What is far worse than our views on these issues is the lack of love evangelicalism has shown to those who disagree.
“By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
The next generation looks at statements like this and concludes that many evangelicals must not be disciples of Jesus.
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] There is a chart of 40 “evangelical” churches and their interrelationships available on the National Association of Evangelicals website
[2] See Daniel Williams, Defenders of the Unborn, Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (December 4, 2015). https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/christian-right-discovered-abortion-rights-transformed-culture-wars/. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[3] Abortion did not become the defining issue for American evangelicals until 1980. Prior to the 1980s abortion was viewed by many evangelicals as a “Catholic” issue. Because evangelicals were often anti-Catholic, this meant that most evangelicals prior to 1980 were pro-abortion.
[4] See https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/02/05/race-not-abortion-was-founding-issue-religious-right/A5rnmClvuAU7EaThaNLAnK/story.html. Last accessed 9-7-20. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133. Last accessed 9-7-20.
[5] Certainly, there are a number who are over 40 as well.
Mark week #3 Devotional Guide
JANUARY 14, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
Monday: Read Mark 10:1-31
The theme of discipleship dominates this section. Jesus and the disciples are heading for Jerusalem where He will die. Jesus is going to become more and more explicit with them explaining what “take up your cross and follow Me” means (8:34).
In this passage, Mark tells three encounters that illustrate for us Jesus’ understanding of discipleship with respect to marriage (1-12), children (13-16), and possessions (17-31). Discipleship is not only proper behavior in marriage relations, with children, and with possessions but in fully following Jesus.
If we only had Mark’s account of Jesus’ teaching on divorce, then we would conclude that Jesus does not permit divorce at all. Understanding the context, however, and the fact that Matt 19 and Luke 16 note that Jesus permitted divorce on certain grounds, provides some much needed insights.
First, Jesus’ teaching on divorce here must be understood in light of the kingdom of God: note Jesus’ appeal to Genesis 1 (10:6-8). For Jesus, divorce violates God’s intent at creation. Since the kingdom of God is the restoration and perfection of creation, there should be no divorce. We must recognize that this is the ideal: i.e., the standard: how it is supposed to be. Jesus permits divorce in Matthew 19 and Paul does so in 1 Corinthians 7. How do we reconcile this? Jesus establishes the way it should be in Mark 10. Matthew 19 and 1 Corinthians 7, however, affirm that in light of the continued presence of sin and death, divorce may be permissible—though the ideal should not be easily set aside.
Secondly, Jesus’ words on divorce here were a direct challenge to Herod Antipas. This is the context for Jesus’ remarks. We know because Mark places this conversation in the “region of Judea and beyond the Jordan” (10:1). This is where Herod Antipas ruled. Herod is the one whose marriage John the Baptist had opposed because Antipas married Herodias his brother’s wife, who was also his niece. Also, in 10:12, Jesus says, “if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.” This provision makes no sense. There was no circumstance in Israel in which a woman was allowed, let alone why she would want to, to divorce her husband. Jesus must have been speaking about the injustices that occurred to John the Baptist when he condemned Antipas’ marriage to Herodias.
The kingdom belongs to children (14). For Jesus, the kingdom is for those deemed “children”: i.e., the unimportant: outcasts, needy, oppressed, poor, etc. Ironically, the disciples were “rebuking” (13) those who brought children to Jesus. For Jesus, discipleship means to welcome and embrace (16) those whom society deems unimportant.
The conversation with the rich man (17-31) (we know he is rich because he “owned much property”; 23; Luke 18; calls him a ruler; & Matt 19 says he was young), affirms Jesus’ radical call to self-denial (21). Jesus notes the impossibility of entering the Kingdom through human achievement (27).
The man asks what he must do to enter eternal life (17). Jesus lists 5 of the final 6 commandments and tells him to obey them. A closer look shows that Jesus omitted “thou shall not covet” and adds “do not defraud” (19). It is critical to understand that in ancient Israel the only way one could acquire “much land” (22) was by exploiting (defrauding) the vulnerable: i.e., the “children” or the poor. This man didn’t just covet the land of the poor, he defrauded them and took it!
Nonetheless, the man claims to have obeyed them all. So, Jesus tells him to sell his property and give to the poor (21). The man wasn’t willing to leave his unjust ways behind. For Jesus, giving to the poor (doing justice) and having eternal life were two sides of the same coin!
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Tuesday: Read Mark 10:32-52
Mark 10:32-34 is Jesus’ third “passion prediction” (i.e., the description of His “suffering” that awaits His arrival in Jerusalem: cf 8:31; 9:31). The closer they get to Jerusalem the more specific Jesus becomes about what awaits Him there (33-34). Note that those who followed were “fearful” (32).
The disciples, however, still do not understand that Jesus is going to Jerusalem to suffer, die, and rise again. They believe that they are heading to Jerusalem so that Jesus might become the King. James and John, and likely the rest of the group, expect Jesus to take his seat on the throne in Jerusalem—which He did, it is just that Jesus’ coronation was on the cross (not exactly the kind of crowning moment they were hoping for). So, James and John ask Jesus if they can sit on His right and His left when He takes His seat on the throne in Jerusalem (37). Jesus replies, “you do not know what you are asking for” (38). He, then, uses two metaphors, a cup and baptism (38-39), both of which express suffering. Those two seats, Jesus explains, have already been assigned (40). They are for the two thieves who will be crucified alongside Him.
Mark 10:42-45 is critical for understanding Jesus and the kingdom. The bottom line is that the way Jesus does power is not the way the world does it! The world uses power, money, and war to promote its agenda (NB: every nation uses power, money, and war to promote its agenda). Jesus says, “not in my kingdom!” In His kingdom, the rulers become the servants. As He says, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give His life a ransom for many” (10:45).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Wednesday: Read Mark 11:1-26
Jesus has finally reached Jerusalem. We have been waiting for this moment since Mark 1:2: which was a citation of Malachi 3:1: “And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple.”
Jesus enters on the back of a donkey—which was a blatant claim to being the King. After all, this is the same way that Solomon entered Jerusalem when he was crowned king (1 Kings 1:32-40). The people hail Jesus as the king. They were longing for the day when a Jewish king would be installed, and Rome would be defeated. How is it, then, that the people reject Jesus at His crucifixion? It is because a suffering king is not what they wanted. Once they see Jesus about to be crucified they conclude that Jesus is no better than the dozens of other messianic pretenders that have gone before Him in recent years.
In Mark 11:11, Jesus enters Jerusalem and the temple, looks around, and leaves. What? What did He see? A careful reading of Malachi 3 might clue us in. In Mal 3:1, it says that the Lord is coming to His temple. In Mal 3:2, however, it states that His coming to the temple will not be all good news: “But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears?” (Mal 3:2). The Lord is coming to His temple. But He is doing so in judgment!
Mark explains that when Jesus “looked around” (11) He didn’t see any fruit! Mark’s use of sandwiching brings this out. Mark 11:12-14 records Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree because it had no fruit (12-14). Then, in Mark 11:15, Jesus again enters Jerusalem. Consequently, we realize that Jesus enters Jerusalem and the temple (11:11, 15) and was looking for fruit (11:12-14) and didn’t find any! What kind of fruit was He looking for? The next account (11:15-17) tells us the answer to this question: He was looking for fruit that welcomed the nations into the community of God’s people (17).
As a result, Jesus condemns the temple establishment: “whoever says to this mountain be . . . cast into the sea” (23). “Mountain” is a common symbol for kingdoms (the capital city was always on a mountain) and a temple (which was at the highest point in the capital city). The “sea” is a symbol of chaos (Gen 1:2) and death or hell (Mark 5:13). Jesus was affirming that the mountain of the temple will be cast into the sea/death.
(tune in to the determinetruth podcast that will be aired Jan 25, 2022, for an in-depth discussion of the Sea).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
NB: To receive auto-updates when new blog posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage on determinetruth.com.
My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Thursday: Read Mark 11:27-12:12 (see Isa 5:1-7; Ps 118:19-23)
The leadership in Jerusalem did not like Jesus or His actions. The temple was the center of their society—it was their Congressional building, their Parliament, their place of authority. Those who ran the temple ran society. When Jesus overturns the tables and creates havoc, He is directing challenging their authority.
(NB: Jesus was not “cleansing” the temple, He was condemning or pronouncing judgment on it—i.e., its leadership. Note that a “den of robbers” (17) means the place where the robbers hide, not the place where they do wrong). Thus, the problem was not what they were doing in the temple, but what they were doing outside it (12:40)—the injustices and oppression of the “children,” as well as the exclusion of the nations.
As a result of Jesus’ actions in the temple, the leadership in Jerusalem, who are very much threatened by Jesus and His popularity among the people, ask Jesus, “by what authority” are you doing these things? (28). The answer, which it appears that Jesus refuses to give them (11:33), is given in the parable of 12:1-12. Since He answers them with a parable, they don’t understand (remember, to understand a parable you must come to Jesus for the explanation; 4:10, 33-34). Jesus’ answer is that His authority is found in that He is the “beloved Son” (12:6) of the owner!
They have been entrusted with the Land God has given them and are responsible for doing justice to all with it. Instead, as we will see in tomorrow’s reading (12:40), they were devouring “widow’s houses” (widows = children).
The parable of the vine-growers is the story of Israel with Jesus the center and final straw. He is a prophet who will suffer like the prophets. He sows seeds (4:3-9) and they do not listen (as with Isaiah). Ironically, the rejection of Jesus becomes the means by which He, the Stone, establishes the new creation/temple.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Friday Read Mark 12:13-40
Jesus is challenged with a series of questions intended to put Him in a predicament. These challenges have been radically misunderstood in the modern church. To understand them well, it is critical to remember that Jesus’ fundamental message is: “I am the King who has come to establish an eternal kingdom on Earth as it is in heaven, and I am welcoming all who repent (including you Romans, tax-collectors, prostitutes, handicapped, etc.—i.e., anyone willing to acknowledge that they are the “children”).
The questions Jesus is asked are intended to create a divide: It is either Rome or us! If Jesus chooses “Rome,” He will be rejected by the people. If He chooses “us,” He will be killed by Rome. Win-win for the religious leaders. These questions were also intended to drive Jesus to confess publicly what they suspected He was affirming privately. Namely, that He is the Messiah and that He is divine. The questions are also intended to challenge Jesus’ authority, which has been on Mark’s mind since 11:28.
The first question of paying taxes is a no-brainer: everyone knows it is illegal to pay taxes to Rome (this has been seriously misunderstood by many modern teachers). One cannot be loyal to God and to Caesar at the same time. They are fundamentally opposed to one another. Of course, to not pay taxes is treason and will result in your crucifixion or beheading!
Jesus asks them to show Him a coin. When they pull one out of their pockets, Jesus has them caught in their own hypocrisy. His answer is: what are you doing with an image of Caesar in your pockets? You are carrying His image, not Me!—a violation of the 10 commandments. When Jesus says, “give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,” He is restating the first two commandments. All Jews know that “The earth is the Lord’s, and all it contains” (Ps 24:1). Jesus was not saying, “give some things to God and others to Caesar.” It is all God’s! Instead, he was demanding absolute allegiance to Himself! Technically, then, Jesus was not saying to pay taxes. Of course, He was not saying “don’t pay taxes” either. On one occasion, He even paid them (Matt 17:24-27).
The question regarding marriage and remarriage is more complicated. Simply put, Jesus was contrasting the Sadducee’s view with His. Jesus was presenting a resurrected and glorified new creation. In the ancient world, offspring were necessary in order to provide for the parents when they aged and were not able to work. Jesus’ answer is that in the new creation, there will be no need for offspring because there will be no death. That is, no one will become old and needy.
The final question: “What is the greatest commandment?” is the most significant. First off, notice that this question does not appear to be a trick question. Every Jewish child knows from the time they can talk that the great commandment is from Deut 6:4-9 (the Shema), which says that the Lord is One and He alone is worthy of worship.
What were they asking then? They were likely asking Jesus if He was claiming to be that One God who is worthy of worship? Jesus doesn’t take the bait. Well, He kinda does, but again they don’t understand. His simple answer is “to love the Lord your God” (we will look at the “love your neighbor” in our study of Luke) is the greatest commandment—so easy a 3-year-old could have answered it.
Both Mark 12:35-37 and Matt 22:41-45 note that immediately after this question Jesus presents a riddle about David and Psalm 110:1. The riddle says, David called the Messiah—i.e., his son—“Lord” (Ps 110:1), so what’s the problem? Jesus was saying, “if I am David’s son, and David called me ‘Lord’, then what’s the problem with others calling Me Lord? They, of course, did not understand!
Note: the determinetruth podcast of Sept 21, 2021, addresses this passage more completely.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
For further study see Scot McKnight The Jesus Creed
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
Monday: Read Mark 10:1-31
The theme of discipleship dominates this section. Jesus and the disciples are heading for Jerusalem where He will die. Jesus is going to become more and more explicit with them explaining what “take up your cross and follow Me” means (8:34).
In this passage, Mark tells three encounters that illustrate for us Jesus’ understanding of discipleship with respect to marriage (1-12), children (13-16), and possessions (17-31). Discipleship is not only proper behavior in marriage relations, with children, and with possessions but in fully following Jesus.
If we only had Mark’s account of Jesus’ teaching on divorce, then we would conclude that Jesus does not permit divorce at all. Understanding the context, however, and the fact that Matt 19 and Luke 16 note that Jesus permitted divorce on certain grounds, provides some much needed insights.
First, Jesus’ teaching on divorce here must be understood in light of the kingdom of God: note Jesus’ appeal to Genesis 1 (10:6-8). For Jesus, divorce violates God’s intent at creation. Since the kingdom of God is the restoration and perfection of creation, there should be no divorce. We must recognize that this is the ideal: i.e., the standard: how it is supposed to be. Jesus permits divorce in Matthew 19 and Paul does so in 1 Corinthians 7. How do we reconcile this? Jesus establishes the way it should be in Mark 10. Matthew 19 and 1 Corinthians 7, however, affirm that in light of the continued presence of sin and death, divorce may be permissible—though the ideal should not be easily set aside.
Secondly, Jesus’ words on divorce here were a direct challenge to Herod Antipas. This is the context for Jesus’ remarks. We know because Mark places this conversation in the “region of Judea and beyond the Jordan” (10:1). This is where Herod Antipas ruled. Herod is the one whose marriage John the Baptist had opposed because Antipas married Herodias his brother’s wife, who was also his niece. Also, in 10:12, Jesus says, “if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.” This provision makes no sense. There was no circumstance in Israel in which a woman was allowed, let alone why she would want to, to divorce her husband. Jesus must have been speaking about the injustices that occurred to John the Baptist when he condemned Antipas’ marriage to Herodias.
The kingdom belongs to children (14). For Jesus, the kingdom is for those deemed “children”: i.e., the unimportant: outcasts, needy, oppressed, poor, etc. Ironically, the disciples were “rebuking” (13) those who brought children to Jesus. For Jesus, discipleship means to welcome and embrace (16) those whom society deems unimportant.
The conversation with the rich man (17-31) (we know he is rich because he “owned much property”; 23; Luke 18; calls him a ruler; & Matt 19 says he was young), affirms Jesus’ radical call to self-denial (21). Jesus notes the impossibility of entering the Kingdom through human achievement (27).
The man asks what he must do to enter eternal life (17). Jesus lists 5 of the final 6 commandments and tells him to obey them. A closer look shows that Jesus omitted “thou shall not covet” and adds “do not defraud” (19). It is critical to understand that in ancient Israel the only way one could acquire “much land” (22) was by exploiting (defrauding) the vulnerable: i.e., the “children” or the poor. This man didn’t just covet the land of the poor, he defrauded them and took it!
Nonetheless, the man claims to have obeyed them all. So, Jesus tells him to sell his property and give to the poor (21). The man wasn’t willing to leave his unjust ways behind. For Jesus, giving to the poor (doing justice) and having eternal life were two sides of the same coin!
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- Jesus’ teaching on divorce reminds us that the Kingdom of God includes the restoration of creation. Thus, since God did not intend divorce in His creation, there should be no divorce in the kingdom of God. Reflect on how you can better model the kingdom of God in your inter-personal relationships so that they model God’s intent for creation.
- It is too common for Christians to read the story of the rich young man and conclude that it is a nice story of how Jesus commanded this man to sell everything, but He would never command us to do so. Exactly the opposite of what the text is saying. What is it that Jesus is asking you to give up in order to truly follow Him?
- An excellent resource to supplement this section is David Platt’s, Radical: Taking back your Faith from the American Dream.
Tuesday: Read Mark 10:32-52
Mark 10:32-34 is Jesus’ third “passion prediction” (i.e., the description of His “suffering” that awaits His arrival in Jerusalem: cf 8:31; 9:31). The closer they get to Jerusalem the more specific Jesus becomes about what awaits Him there (33-34). Note that those who followed were “fearful” (32).
The disciples, however, still do not understand that Jesus is going to Jerusalem to suffer, die, and rise again. They believe that they are heading to Jerusalem so that Jesus might become the King. James and John, and likely the rest of the group, expect Jesus to take his seat on the throne in Jerusalem—which He did, it is just that Jesus’ coronation was on the cross (not exactly the kind of crowning moment they were hoping for). So, James and John ask Jesus if they can sit on His right and His left when He takes His seat on the throne in Jerusalem (37). Jesus replies, “you do not know what you are asking for” (38). He, then, uses two metaphors, a cup and baptism (38-39), both of which express suffering. Those two seats, Jesus explains, have already been assigned (40). They are for the two thieves who will be crucified alongside Him.
Mark 10:42-45 is critical for understanding Jesus and the kingdom. The bottom line is that the way Jesus does power is not the way the world does it! The world uses power, money, and war to promote its agenda (NB: every nation uses power, money, and war to promote its agenda). Jesus says, “not in my kingdom!” In His kingdom, the rulers become the servants. As He says, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give His life a ransom for many” (10:45).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- What sort of people do we/you hinder from coming to Jesus by our actions? (our lack of love towards them; our prejudices against them; our failure to treat them as we want to be treated, etc).
- Denying oneself, following Jesus, and loving the other by living cross-bearing lives and suffering are interrelated. The life that Jesus calls us to is not easy. Suffering will come. Ask the Lord for help so that you may overcome prejudice, hatred, selfishness, pride, and whatever stands in the way of living a cross-bearing life of service for the sake of the other. (Imagine if all Christians lived this way more often! What a testimony it would be for the kingdom!)
Wednesday: Read Mark 11:1-26
Jesus has finally reached Jerusalem. We have been waiting for this moment since Mark 1:2: which was a citation of Malachi 3:1: “And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple.”
Jesus enters on the back of a donkey—which was a blatant claim to being the King. After all, this is the same way that Solomon entered Jerusalem when he was crowned king (1 Kings 1:32-40). The people hail Jesus as the king. They were longing for the day when a Jewish king would be installed, and Rome would be defeated. How is it, then, that the people reject Jesus at His crucifixion? It is because a suffering king is not what they wanted. Once they see Jesus about to be crucified they conclude that Jesus is no better than the dozens of other messianic pretenders that have gone before Him in recent years.
In Mark 11:11, Jesus enters Jerusalem and the temple, looks around, and leaves. What? What did He see? A careful reading of Malachi 3 might clue us in. In Mal 3:1, it says that the Lord is coming to His temple. In Mal 3:2, however, it states that His coming to the temple will not be all good news: “But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears?” (Mal 3:2). The Lord is coming to His temple. But He is doing so in judgment!
Mark explains that when Jesus “looked around” (11) He didn’t see any fruit! Mark’s use of sandwiching brings this out. Mark 11:12-14 records Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree because it had no fruit (12-14). Then, in Mark 11:15, Jesus again enters Jerusalem. Consequently, we realize that Jesus enters Jerusalem and the temple (11:11, 15) and was looking for fruit (11:12-14) and didn’t find any! What kind of fruit was He looking for? The next account (11:15-17) tells us the answer to this question: He was looking for fruit that welcomed the nations into the community of God’s people (17).
As a result, Jesus condemns the temple establishment: “whoever says to this mountain be . . . cast into the sea” (23). “Mountain” is a common symbol for kingdoms (the capital city was always on a mountain) and a temple (which was at the highest point in the capital city). The “sea” is a symbol of chaos (Gen 1:2) and death or hell (Mark 5:13). Jesus was affirming that the mountain of the temple will be cast into the sea/death.
(tune in to the determinetruth podcast that will be aired Jan 25, 2022, for an in-depth discussion of the Sea).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- What do you think Jesus might praise if He entered our churches today?
- What might Jesus condemn if He entered our churches today?
- If the nations are supposed to be worshipping together in the Kingdom of God (see Rev 7:9-17), why are most of our churches so ethnically divided? What can/should we do to change this?
- Find someone of a different ethnic or religious background and spend an hour getting to know them
NB: To receive auto-updates when new blog posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage on determinetruth.com.
My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Thursday: Read Mark 11:27-12:12 (see Isa 5:1-7; Ps 118:19-23)
The leadership in Jerusalem did not like Jesus or His actions. The temple was the center of their society—it was their Congressional building, their Parliament, their place of authority. Those who ran the temple ran society. When Jesus overturns the tables and creates havoc, He is directing challenging their authority.
(NB: Jesus was not “cleansing” the temple, He was condemning or pronouncing judgment on it—i.e., its leadership. Note that a “den of robbers” (17) means the place where the robbers hide, not the place where they do wrong). Thus, the problem was not what they were doing in the temple, but what they were doing outside it (12:40)—the injustices and oppression of the “children,” as well as the exclusion of the nations.
As a result of Jesus’ actions in the temple, the leadership in Jerusalem, who are very much threatened by Jesus and His popularity among the people, ask Jesus, “by what authority” are you doing these things? (28). The answer, which it appears that Jesus refuses to give them (11:33), is given in the parable of 12:1-12. Since He answers them with a parable, they don’t understand (remember, to understand a parable you must come to Jesus for the explanation; 4:10, 33-34). Jesus’ answer is that His authority is found in that He is the “beloved Son” (12:6) of the owner!
They have been entrusted with the Land God has given them and are responsible for doing justice to all with it. Instead, as we will see in tomorrow’s reading (12:40), they were devouring “widow’s houses” (widows = children).
The parable of the vine-growers is the story of Israel with Jesus the center and final straw. He is a prophet who will suffer like the prophets. He sows seeds (4:3-9) and they do not listen (as with Isaiah). Ironically, the rejection of Jesus becomes the means by which He, the Stone, establishes the new creation/temple.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- What resources or gifts has God given to you/us so that we might bless others with? How well are they being used? How might you/we do better?
- What are some things that our churches do that exclude others or make them feel unwelcome (note this is a very important question. Most churches that I know believe they are very friendly and welcoming, yet they do not realize that much of what happens on a weekend service in these churches screams “you are not welcome here” to others).
Friday Read Mark 12:13-40
Jesus is challenged with a series of questions intended to put Him in a predicament. These challenges have been radically misunderstood in the modern church. To understand them well, it is critical to remember that Jesus’ fundamental message is: “I am the King who has come to establish an eternal kingdom on Earth as it is in heaven, and I am welcoming all who repent (including you Romans, tax-collectors, prostitutes, handicapped, etc.—i.e., anyone willing to acknowledge that they are the “children”).
The questions Jesus is asked are intended to create a divide: It is either Rome or us! If Jesus chooses “Rome,” He will be rejected by the people. If He chooses “us,” He will be killed by Rome. Win-win for the religious leaders. These questions were also intended to drive Jesus to confess publicly what they suspected He was affirming privately. Namely, that He is the Messiah and that He is divine. The questions are also intended to challenge Jesus’ authority, which has been on Mark’s mind since 11:28.
The first question of paying taxes is a no-brainer: everyone knows it is illegal to pay taxes to Rome (this has been seriously misunderstood by many modern teachers). One cannot be loyal to God and to Caesar at the same time. They are fundamentally opposed to one another. Of course, to not pay taxes is treason and will result in your crucifixion or beheading!
Jesus asks them to show Him a coin. When they pull one out of their pockets, Jesus has them caught in their own hypocrisy. His answer is: what are you doing with an image of Caesar in your pockets? You are carrying His image, not Me!—a violation of the 10 commandments. When Jesus says, “give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,” He is restating the first two commandments. All Jews know that “The earth is the Lord’s, and all it contains” (Ps 24:1). Jesus was not saying, “give some things to God and others to Caesar.” It is all God’s! Instead, he was demanding absolute allegiance to Himself! Technically, then, Jesus was not saying to pay taxes. Of course, He was not saying “don’t pay taxes” either. On one occasion, He even paid them (Matt 17:24-27).
The question regarding marriage and remarriage is more complicated. Simply put, Jesus was contrasting the Sadducee’s view with His. Jesus was presenting a resurrected and glorified new creation. In the ancient world, offspring were necessary in order to provide for the parents when they aged and were not able to work. Jesus’ answer is that in the new creation, there will be no need for offspring because there will be no death. That is, no one will become old and needy.
The final question: “What is the greatest commandment?” is the most significant. First off, notice that this question does not appear to be a trick question. Every Jewish child knows from the time they can talk that the great commandment is from Deut 6:4-9 (the Shema), which says that the Lord is One and He alone is worthy of worship.
What were they asking then? They were likely asking Jesus if He was claiming to be that One God who is worthy of worship? Jesus doesn’t take the bait. Well, He kinda does, but again they don’t understand. His simple answer is “to love the Lord your God” (we will look at the “love your neighbor” in our study of Luke) is the greatest commandment—so easy a 3-year-old could have answered it.
Both Mark 12:35-37 and Matt 22:41-45 note that immediately after this question Jesus presents a riddle about David and Psalm 110:1. The riddle says, David called the Messiah—i.e., his son—“Lord” (Ps 110:1), so what’s the problem? Jesus was saying, “if I am David’s son, and David called me ‘Lord’, then what’s the problem with others calling Me Lord? They, of course, did not understand!
Note: the determinetruth podcast of Sept 21, 2021, addresses this passage more completely.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- “The Earth is the Lord’s and everything in it.” Except my _____ and ______. We too compromise when it comes to Christ and many things. What does absolute allegiance to Christ look like for you? That is, what are some areas of your life or beliefs that you still try to claim ownership on? Material goods, money, time, pride, anger?
- Set aside some time to pray and ask the Lord to help you let Him be the Lord of all areas of your life.
For further study see Scot McKnight The Jesus Creed
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
What is the Church?
JANUARY 11, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
In my last post, I asked why can’t we just leave the church?
I noted that one cannot leave because the Church is the body of Christ. In other words, you can’t leave the church because you are the Church.
Now, this could be taken in several ways: one I agree with and one I do not agree with—well, I kinda don’t agree with it. I’ll begin with the latter.
First, those who think that a person can’t be a Christian unless they are part of a church are mistaken. We are the body of Christ not because we are members of a particular church but because we are members of the Church: that is His body.
The book of Ephesians affirms: “because we are members of His body” (Eph 5:30).
The book of Colossians then says that Christ is the head of this body: “He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything (Col 1:18).
I don’t suspect that I need to offer more proof for this supposition. Those who acknowledge Jesus as Lord have been adopted into the body of Christ which is the Church. This is why Paul refers to his prior activities of persecuting Christians in terms of persecuting the church: “I persecuted the church of God” (1 Cor 15:9). We don’t need to ask if he persecuted individuals or if he persecuted the Church. The answer is “yes.”
You can’t leave the church because you are the Church, but the church transcends a local gathering of believers.
Secondly, I mean this a way of affirming those who have become so disillusioned with the institution of the western evangelical church that they want to leave. You are the Church. Whether or not you should be connected to a local church is another question.
Whatever we have to say, then, we must begin with an extremely high view of the Church! We must love the Church as Christ loved it and laid down His life for it: not the church as an institution, but the Church as the body of Christ.
Sure, one could easily point to the history of the Church and the tremendous evils that have been done and are being done in the Name of Christ. This is certainly something that we need to reckon with. And we really do need to reckon with it–including the many problems within evangelicalism.
But we must begin by acknowledging that the Church has also done tremendous good in this world.
Christians started orphanages. They spoke against the Roman practice of exposure (Romans abandoned, or exposed, unwanted children leaving them to die) and began rescuing and adopting exposed children.
Christians cared for widows who were left to fend for themselves because they could not contribute to society any longer. Paul even notes a requirement for putting widows on “the list” so that they might fall under the care of the Church (1 Tim 5:9-10).
Christians started hospitals. They started schools. They started homeless shelters.
Even in the US, amidst the crisis that I believe the western church is facing, the body of Christ continues to manifest the presence of Christ to the world.
As Jonathan Haidt notes, “By many different measures religiously observant Americans are better neighbors and better citizens than secular Americans—they are more generous with their time and money, especially in helping the needy, and they are more active in community life.”[1]
The Church is the embodiment of Christ on Earth.
The Church is supposed to be a living organism that manifests the love of Christ to the world. It is not supposed to be an institution like it has often become. The Church is called to be advocates of the Kingdom of God in rejection of the kingdoms of this world.
The Church is supposed to value the human dignity of all persons.
And behind the scenes of all those making noise and gaining large crowds and often making a mockery of what Christ has called us to be, there is a remnant of faithful, loving, and sacrificial people who have learned to truly deny themselves and are taking up their crosses and making Him known.
The reason why we don’t often see them is because they are not seeking to be seen. They are not interested in gaining large crowds and lots of attention. They are not doing the work of Christ to be seen by people. They don’t make for great headlines. (They make for great stories, but the media rarely covers them because sex, violence, and conflict sell far more than selfless acts of love).
For all the disillusionment that abounds in our local churches, all the stories of narcissist pastors run amuck, all the sexual abuse scandals that are being hidden to protect the “sanctity” of the institutional church and those who lead them, all the misuses of funds, all the hate that is spewed from pulpits and cathedrals against to those who are not “like us,” all the church splits because the sanctuary was too warm or because they dared let a woman preach in church, all the tearing down of good pastors and their families because they dared speak against racial injustice or advocate for environmental preservation, for all of it, and there is so much more, there are also many stories of good people who are doing good things in the name of Christ and giving of their time, their money, and their very selves so that an other may have dignity.
The Church is the chosen people of God who have been called to make Christ known to the nations. This is so central that I would not hesitate to say that this is the primary mission of the Church. This is why the Church exists.
There is no question that much of evangelicalism fails to represent this mission. Certainly, many of the main faces of evangelicalism have failed in this mission and have instead championed other causes that have done great harm. But we cannot deny that there are many, often behind the scenes, who are still exemplifying the cross-bearing love of Christ.
There is still a lot more, of course, to be said.
In our next post, we will ask: “what is evangelicalism anyways?”
NB: My goal is to keep these
posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (p. 310). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. Citing the work of Putnam and Campbell.
In my last post, I asked why can’t we just leave the church?
I noted that one cannot leave because the Church is the body of Christ. In other words, you can’t leave the church because you are the Church.
Now, this could be taken in several ways: one I agree with and one I do not agree with—well, I kinda don’t agree with it. I’ll begin with the latter.
First, those who think that a person can’t be a Christian unless they are part of a church are mistaken. We are the body of Christ not because we are members of a particular church but because we are members of the Church: that is His body.
The book of Ephesians affirms: “because we are members of His body” (Eph 5:30).
The book of Colossians then says that Christ is the head of this body: “He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything (Col 1:18).
I don’t suspect that I need to offer more proof for this supposition. Those who acknowledge Jesus as Lord have been adopted into the body of Christ which is the Church. This is why Paul refers to his prior activities of persecuting Christians in terms of persecuting the church: “I persecuted the church of God” (1 Cor 15:9). We don’t need to ask if he persecuted individuals or if he persecuted the Church. The answer is “yes.”
You can’t leave the church because you are the Church, but the church transcends a local gathering of believers.
Secondly, I mean this a way of affirming those who have become so disillusioned with the institution of the western evangelical church that they want to leave. You are the Church. Whether or not you should be connected to a local church is another question.
Whatever we have to say, then, we must begin with an extremely high view of the Church! We must love the Church as Christ loved it and laid down His life for it: not the church as an institution, but the Church as the body of Christ.
Sure, one could easily point to the history of the Church and the tremendous evils that have been done and are being done in the Name of Christ. This is certainly something that we need to reckon with. And we really do need to reckon with it–including the many problems within evangelicalism.
But we must begin by acknowledging that the Church has also done tremendous good in this world.
Christians started orphanages. They spoke against the Roman practice of exposure (Romans abandoned, or exposed, unwanted children leaving them to die) and began rescuing and adopting exposed children.
Christians cared for widows who were left to fend for themselves because they could not contribute to society any longer. Paul even notes a requirement for putting widows on “the list” so that they might fall under the care of the Church (1 Tim 5:9-10).
Christians started hospitals. They started schools. They started homeless shelters.
Even in the US, amidst the crisis that I believe the western church is facing, the body of Christ continues to manifest the presence of Christ to the world.
As Jonathan Haidt notes, “By many different measures religiously observant Americans are better neighbors and better citizens than secular Americans—they are more generous with their time and money, especially in helping the needy, and they are more active in community life.”[1]
The Church is the embodiment of Christ on Earth.
The Church is supposed to be a living organism that manifests the love of Christ to the world. It is not supposed to be an institution like it has often become. The Church is called to be advocates of the Kingdom of God in rejection of the kingdoms of this world.
The Church is supposed to value the human dignity of all persons.
And behind the scenes of all those making noise and gaining large crowds and often making a mockery of what Christ has called us to be, there is a remnant of faithful, loving, and sacrificial people who have learned to truly deny themselves and are taking up their crosses and making Him known.
The reason why we don’t often see them is because they are not seeking to be seen. They are not interested in gaining large crowds and lots of attention. They are not doing the work of Christ to be seen by people. They don’t make for great headlines. (They make for great stories, but the media rarely covers them because sex, violence, and conflict sell far more than selfless acts of love).
For all the disillusionment that abounds in our local churches, all the stories of narcissist pastors run amuck, all the sexual abuse scandals that are being hidden to protect the “sanctity” of the institutional church and those who lead them, all the misuses of funds, all the hate that is spewed from pulpits and cathedrals against to those who are not “like us,” all the church splits because the sanctuary was too warm or because they dared let a woman preach in church, all the tearing down of good pastors and their families because they dared speak against racial injustice or advocate for environmental preservation, for all of it, and there is so much more, there are also many stories of good people who are doing good things in the name of Christ and giving of their time, their money, and their very selves so that an other may have dignity.
The Church is the chosen people of God who have been called to make Christ known to the nations. This is so central that I would not hesitate to say that this is the primary mission of the Church. This is why the Church exists.
There is no question that much of evangelicalism fails to represent this mission. Certainly, many of the main faces of evangelicalism have failed in this mission and have instead championed other causes that have done great harm. But we cannot deny that there are many, often behind the scenes, who are still exemplifying the cross-bearing love of Christ.
There is still a lot more, of course, to be said.
In our next post, we will ask: “what is evangelicalism anyways?”
NB: My goal is to keep these
posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (p. 310). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. Citing the work of Putnam and Campbell.
Mark Week #2 Devotional Guide 2022
JANUARY 7, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
A devotional guide to the Gospel of Mark[1]
Week 2
Monday: Read Mark 6:33-56; 8:1-10
The reason for skipping over Mark 7, which you will read tomorrow, is that you may read the two feeding stories at the same time. As you read, make note of the comparisons. What things happen in both? What are the differences?
A careful reading of the feeding stories notes that there are several allusions to Moses’ leadership among the Israelites. Moses divided the people into hundreds, fifties, and tens (Exod 18:21, 25). Jesus’ multiplying the bread reminds us of the manna the Israelites ate each morning.
In addition, Mark notes that the people looked like “sheep without a shepherd” (6:34). This is a common OT depiction of a leader in Israel (especially a military one; see Num 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; Ezek 34:12 [see especially 34:1-13]; Zech 10:2).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Note: Don’t worry about the answers yet! Mark will help us answer these questions during Wednesday’s reading!
(If you want to “look ahead,” we will discuss this passage on the Determinetruth podcast which airs Jan 11, 2022).
Tuesday: Read Mark 7:1-37
Today’s reading is notably difficult to understand. We would do well to notice first is that it is the middle portion of a sandwich: that is, the two feeding accounts, which you read yesterday, make a sandwich with Mark 7 being the middle of the sandwich (the peanut butter and Jelly or the turkey and swiss if you will).
Corban was a traditional practice in which one would designate a portion of their money for temple service. Once done, this money could not be used for mundane matters: such as caring for elderly parents—the very thing the OT commands us to do! This means that the religious leaders were assisting people from violating the Torah (i.e., the OT law).
One significance of Mark 7 is that Jesus declares “all foods clean” (7:19). When Jesus asks, “are you so lacking in understanding?” (7:18), we are clued in that something greater than just what appears at face value is going on. It suggests that He has spoken parabolically (in parables): note, 7:17. What then is the significance of Jesus’ declaring all food clean? It means that they may eat with the Gentiles (i.e., the nations) and the Gentiles may eat with them! This will become vital for our study of the book of Acts and much of Paul’s writings (especially Galatians). Remember also that the early Christians ate together each week.
Note that the next story has Jesus in the region of Tyre (consult a Bible map, or even better a Bible dictionary, or do a google search on ancient Tyre), which is Gentile territory, and He speaks to a woman by referring to “bread” (8:27). Though the passage is indeed a bit difficult, the key here is that Jesus is not being rude. He is taking the Gospel to the “unclean.” (As far as the Jewish designations were concerned Gentiles were unclean. Also, note that she is the first person to understand a parable! 7:28)
If you would like a more complete explanation of the account of the Syrophoenician woman and Jesus you will want to read Ian Paul’s blog post on this passage.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Wednesday: Read Mark 8:11-39
Here we are confronted with the reality that Mark wanted us to ask, “why count the baskets of broken pieces they picked up?” Jesus even asks them! Mark ends this episode (8:21) with a question that he does not answer. We presume that he doesn’t answer it because he has discussed this with his readers in the past and they knew the answer! Of course, we do not know the answer—not without someone telling us. (Again, for a complete discussion of this passage and to learn the answer, see the Determinetruth podcast Jan 11, 2022).
The story of the healing of the blind man, which is critical for the outline of Mark’s gospel, is interesting (we will discuss the outline of Mark on the Determinetruth podcast on Jan 18, 2022.). The disciples were just asked, “do you not yet understand?” (8:21). In 8:17, they were asked, “do you not yet see or understand?” Then a blind man is healed. Coincidence? I think not. Note that the blind man is not healed completely. At least not at first. Could it be that the healing of the blind man in stages mimics the disciples’ understanding? That is, they understand only a little, but soon they will be able to “see” and “understand” everything.
Mark 8:27-38 is perhaps the center of the Gospel. For Mark, the question of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus is secondary only to his portrait of Jesus as the Son of God. There is no clearer definition of discipleship and what it entails than Mark 8:34-38. For Mark, discipleship includes projecting the Christian faith into a context of suffering and even death (8:34-38; 13:1-13). Mark writes to inform Christians undergoing persecution that Jesus taught that such persecutions would come; to encourage Christians in times of trouble and persecution by reminding them that Jesus also suffered, and to demonstrate that the purpose and mission of Jesus was to serve by His death (10:45)!
Putting these two key themes together (Jesus and discipleship) means that it is essential to know who Jesus is and what it means to be a disciple: namely, He is the King, and this requires taking up your cross and following Him (8:34-38). After all, if this was how Jesus was installed as king—namely, at the cross, then why would they expect to become kings differently? It is in this context that Jesus repeatedly states that He is going to Jerusalem to die (cf 8:31; 9:31; 10:32-34).
If we want to be His disciples, we must deny ourselves and take up our crosses and follow Him! (8:34).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Thursday: Read Mark 9:1-29
Though Jesus explained clearly to His disciples who He is (8:27-33), this does not mean that they understood. They failed to understand that Jesus must die (8:31-32), and they definitely did not understand that Jesus must rise from the dead (9:9-13; cf 9:30-32; 10:32-34). The Transfiguration may well have served to demonstrate for them His identity. Even then, they may not have understood the significance of this until after the resurrection.
Mark’s version of the transfiguration of Christ—where Christ is shown in His glory—seems again to be modeled on Moses and Mt Sinai (cf Exod 24:16).
The disciples’ inability to cast out the demon demonstrates their continued failure to truly understand. Note that Jesus takes the boy by the hand and “raises” him (9:27). And that this event is sandwiched between Jesus’ two predictions of His own resurrection! (see: 9:9, 31).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
Friday: Read Mark 9:30-50
Again, the disciples fail to understand Jesus’ explicit statement that He was going to rise (we will discuss the Jewish view of resurrection when we read John 11).
The warning of Jesus in 9:38-50 is admittedly difficult. The first key is that Jesus is using “little ones” to refer to any of His followers and not just children (see 9:41). Secondly, Jesus is speaking hyperbolically (i.e., exaggeration). He is not asking them to maim themselves (as evidenced by the fact that this practice was not carried out by anyone in the early church).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
[2] It is very important to remember that the books of the Bible were initially “read” aloud by one person and “heard” by everyone else. Bibles were not read for private devotion by the common person until after the invention of the printing press in the 15th century. We would do well to “listen” to the Bible more!
[3] We will explain these accounts in an upcoming podcast. So, if you want to “understand,” then tune into the determinetruth podcast on Jan 18, 2022.
[4] Note that in Mark’s gospel it is the Scribes who are the primary antagonists to Jesus. Scribes were professional “lawyers”—meaning they were experts in the OT Law. The Scribes were not necessarily Pharisees. A Scribe is a profession and they may adhere to the beliefs of any of the “parties” within the first-century Jewish communities.
[5] Note that the cursing of the fig tree (11:12-14) is also the bottom piece of bread of another sandwich. The peanut butter and jelly is the havoc in the temple (11:15-19). The withered fig tree (11:20) is the top piece of bread!
A devotional guide to the Gospel of Mark[1]
Week 2
Monday: Read Mark 6:33-56; 8:1-10
The reason for skipping over Mark 7, which you will read tomorrow, is that you may read the two feeding stories at the same time. As you read, make note of the comparisons. What things happen in both? What are the differences?
A careful reading of the feeding stories notes that there are several allusions to Moses’ leadership among the Israelites. Moses divided the people into hundreds, fifties, and tens (Exod 18:21, 25). Jesus’ multiplying the bread reminds us of the manna the Israelites ate each morning.
In addition, Mark notes that the people looked like “sheep without a shepherd” (6:34). This is a common OT depiction of a leader in Israel (especially a military one; see Num 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; Ezek 34:12 [see especially 34:1-13]; Zech 10:2).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- What do you think Mark wants his readers to know by depicting Jesus’ feeding the multitudes in accord with the description of Moses?
- Why does Jesus say, “you give them something to eat?” (6:37)
- Why does Jesus make extra bread?
- Why does Mark tell us that He made extra bread?
- Why does Mark tell us how many baskets they picked up?
Note: Don’t worry about the answers yet! Mark will help us answer these questions during Wednesday’s reading!
(If you want to “look ahead,” we will discuss this passage on the Determinetruth podcast which airs Jan 11, 2022).
Tuesday: Read Mark 7:1-37
Today’s reading is notably difficult to understand. We would do well to notice first is that it is the middle portion of a sandwich: that is, the two feeding accounts, which you read yesterday, make a sandwich with Mark 7 being the middle of the sandwich (the peanut butter and Jelly or the turkey and swiss if you will).
Corban was a traditional practice in which one would designate a portion of their money for temple service. Once done, this money could not be used for mundane matters: such as caring for elderly parents—the very thing the OT commands us to do! This means that the religious leaders were assisting people from violating the Torah (i.e., the OT law).
One significance of Mark 7 is that Jesus declares “all foods clean” (7:19). When Jesus asks, “are you so lacking in understanding?” (7:18), we are clued in that something greater than just what appears at face value is going on. It suggests that He has spoken parabolically (in parables): note, 7:17. What then is the significance of Jesus’ declaring all food clean? It means that they may eat with the Gentiles (i.e., the nations) and the Gentiles may eat with them! This will become vital for our study of the book of Acts and much of Paul’s writings (especially Galatians). Remember also that the early Christians ate together each week.
Note that the next story has Jesus in the region of Tyre (consult a Bible map, or even better a Bible dictionary, or do a google search on ancient Tyre), which is Gentile territory, and He speaks to a woman by referring to “bread” (8:27). Though the passage is indeed a bit difficult, the key here is that Jesus is not being rude. He is taking the Gospel to the “unclean.” (As far as the Jewish designations were concerned Gentiles were unclean. Also, note that she is the first person to understand a parable! 7:28)
If you would like a more complete explanation of the account of the Syrophoenician woman and Jesus you will want to read Ian Paul’s blog post on this passage.
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- What sort of religious things might you do that hinder our ability to keep the commandments?
Wednesday: Read Mark 8:11-39
Here we are confronted with the reality that Mark wanted us to ask, “why count the baskets of broken pieces they picked up?” Jesus even asks them! Mark ends this episode (8:21) with a question that he does not answer. We presume that he doesn’t answer it because he has discussed this with his readers in the past and they knew the answer! Of course, we do not know the answer—not without someone telling us. (Again, for a complete discussion of this passage and to learn the answer, see the Determinetruth podcast Jan 11, 2022).
The story of the healing of the blind man, which is critical for the outline of Mark’s gospel, is interesting (we will discuss the outline of Mark on the Determinetruth podcast on Jan 18, 2022.). The disciples were just asked, “do you not yet understand?” (8:21). In 8:17, they were asked, “do you not yet see or understand?” Then a blind man is healed. Coincidence? I think not. Note that the blind man is not healed completely. At least not at first. Could it be that the healing of the blind man in stages mimics the disciples’ understanding? That is, they understand only a little, but soon they will be able to “see” and “understand” everything.
Mark 8:27-38 is perhaps the center of the Gospel. For Mark, the question of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus is secondary only to his portrait of Jesus as the Son of God. There is no clearer definition of discipleship and what it entails than Mark 8:34-38. For Mark, discipleship includes projecting the Christian faith into a context of suffering and even death (8:34-38; 13:1-13). Mark writes to inform Christians undergoing persecution that Jesus taught that such persecutions would come; to encourage Christians in times of trouble and persecution by reminding them that Jesus also suffered, and to demonstrate that the purpose and mission of Jesus was to serve by His death (10:45)!
Putting these two key themes together (Jesus and discipleship) means that it is essential to know who Jesus is and what it means to be a disciple: namely, He is the King, and this requires taking up your cross and following Him (8:34-38). After all, if this was how Jesus was installed as king—namely, at the cross, then why would they expect to become kings differently? It is in this context that Jesus repeatedly states that He is going to Jerusalem to die (cf 8:31; 9:31; 10:32-34).
If we want to be His disciples, we must deny ourselves and take up our crosses and follow Him! (8:34).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- Over the next few weeks memorize Mark 8:34-38.
- Do you understand? If not completely, be encouraged: neither did they. This is why the coming of the Spirit is vital for the Christian life. Ask the Spirit to help you understand! (Note: this is not a request for a miracle in that you don’t need to do anything. It means, keep up the good work and rely on the Spirit to continually strengthen you and increase your faith as you read and study)
- What might cross-bearing-love look like today in your context? (home, marriage, relationships, work, school, community)
- I would not hesitate to claim that learning to live a life characterized by cross-bearing-love is the key to Christian living. Make it a goal to regularly ask yourself: “did I demonstrate cross-bearing-love today?” How could I have done better in ‘x’ situation?
Thursday: Read Mark 9:1-29
Though Jesus explained clearly to His disciples who He is (8:27-33), this does not mean that they understood. They failed to understand that Jesus must die (8:31-32), and they definitely did not understand that Jesus must rise from the dead (9:9-13; cf 9:30-32; 10:32-34). The Transfiguration may well have served to demonstrate for them His identity. Even then, they may not have understood the significance of this until after the resurrection.
Mark’s version of the transfiguration of Christ—where Christ is shown in His glory—seems again to be modeled on Moses and Mt Sinai (cf Exod 24:16).
The disciples’ inability to cast out the demon demonstrates their continued failure to truly understand. Note that Jesus takes the boy by the hand and “raises” him (9:27). And that this event is sandwiched between Jesus’ two predictions of His own resurrection! (see: 9:9, 31).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- Sometimes when we study the Gospels, we can get caught focusing too much on Jesus’ humanity and fail to recall His true glory. Perhaps, the best thing to do for today’s study is to stop and meditate (pray) on “our Father in Heaven; Holy is Your Name” (if you have time, read Isa 6:1-7 and Rev 4:1-11).
Friday: Read Mark 9:30-50
Again, the disciples fail to understand Jesus’ explicit statement that He was going to rise (we will discuss the Jewish view of resurrection when we read John 11).
The warning of Jesus in 9:38-50 is admittedly difficult. The first key is that Jesus is using “little ones” to refer to any of His followers and not just children (see 9:41). Secondly, Jesus is speaking hyperbolically (i.e., exaggeration). He is not asking them to maim themselves (as evidenced by the fact that this practice was not carried out by anyone in the early church).
Questions to ponder/discuss:
- The disciples’ difficulty in understanding what rising from the dead meant was in part because Jesus was not the kind of King they were looking for: they were certainly not looking for a king that would die-thus rising from the dead didn’t factor in. Too often we also reject truths because we don’t like them. We must remember that denying ourselves and taking up our crosses don’t really correspond too much to our likes. Discuss some examples of things you didn’t/don’t want to admit.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
[1] This guide is meant to be done either as a group study over the course of 2 or 4 meetings (Day 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20) or as a private devotion over the course of 4 weeks (or a calendar month—5 lessons per week).
[2] It is very important to remember that the books of the Bible were initially “read” aloud by one person and “heard” by everyone else. Bibles were not read for private devotion by the common person until after the invention of the printing press in the 15th century. We would do well to “listen” to the Bible more!
[3] We will explain these accounts in an upcoming podcast. So, if you want to “understand,” then tune into the determinetruth podcast on Jan 18, 2022.
[4] Note that in Mark’s gospel it is the Scribes who are the primary antagonists to Jesus. Scribes were professional “lawyers”—meaning they were experts in the OT Law. The Scribes were not necessarily Pharisees. A Scribe is a profession and they may adhere to the beliefs of any of the “parties” within the first-century Jewish communities.
[5] Note that the cursing of the fig tree (11:12-14) is also the bottom piece of bread of another sandwich. The peanut butter and jelly is the havoc in the temple (11:15-19). The withered fig tree (11:20) is the top piece of bread!
Church: Can’t I just Leave?
JANUARY 4, 2022 BY ROB DALRYMPLE
Some of you hate the church. Some of you love the church and believe that yours is the best! Some of you have been hurt by the church. Some of you have done the hurting.
For many, the church represents intolerance, hatred, and judgmentalism. It is likely quite accurate to say that most of those outside the church will have nothing to do with it.
Some of those who are now outside the church used to be in it! But their pain, their emptiness, the abuse has been too much. They are done with it (to which I say, “I’m sorry. I understand. And I hope that this series of posts will represent a voice for you.”).
Others have chosen to remain on the inside, but are seriously asking: Can I just quit on this church thing? Can’t I just be a good Christ-follower without ever having to set foot in a church again?
BTW: If you are a Christian in the West and do not know what I mean, please wake up!
The reality is that we have been asking these questions for years now, but it seems that Covid has helped accelerate the process. After all, many haven’t been to a church for almost 2 years now and their faith has been fine—maybe even better. Why, then, should they go back?
I know that many of us want to give up on the church. We want to quit. We believe that we could do more good outside the church than we could inside it!
The problem is: this is not possible.
NB: I am not saying that you must be connected to a particular church in order to do the Lord’s work. The problem is much more complicated than this and the answers must be carefully nuanced. Allow me to explain.
What is the church?
One of the problems that we are confronted with here is that we may not even be thinking of the same thing when we ask the question.
Statements such as—”the church is corrupt, the whole thing; they are all bad”—may be true or false depending on what you mean.
Let me begin our inquiry by positing a question: “What is the pillar and foundation of the truth?”
Now, I have asked this question of biblical scholars and theologians and rarely do I get a correct answer. Some are simply stumped by the question and do not even attempt an answer for fear they might get it wrong. Others are quick to offer up an answer–an answer which by evangelical standards must certainly be correct–“the Bible.” Sorry, incorrect.
NB: If “the Bible” were the correct answer, we would have a problem of a different kind—namely, how do you know what it means? And, who says your answer is correct? (And we could go on—sounds like a topic for my next series of posts)
The answer to the question is found in 1 Tim 3:15. Paul, right after detailing the requirements for being a pastor and a deacon (1 Tim 3:1-13), says,
“Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim 3:14-15 NIV).
The church, says Paul, is the household of God and is the pillar and foundation of the truth.[1] This is probably not what most people think when they consider the church.
Yet, the Church is more than this. In the letter to the Ephesians, he says that the Church is the mystery of God: “. . . that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.”
The mystery of God, Paul says, is that the nations (Gentiles) have become included into the people of God. Thus, Ephesians 3 adds, the Church is the embodiment of God’s mysterious work.
If this were not enough to establish the importance of the Church, we might add that the church is also that for which Christ died! As Ephesians 5 says, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her” (Eph 5:25).
We can’t give up on the Church
So, if you are ready to give up on the church, I understand. But we can’t. To give up on it is to fail to recognize what it is: it is the body of Christ on the earth.
This is why, in my last two posts (click here and here), I noted that taking communion in an “unworthy” manner likely means doing so while sinning against one another.
We can’t give up on the Church. In fact, we too must love the Church for which Christ died.
NB: This doesn’t mean that if you have been abused or have suffered at a church, you must go running back. Not at all. Clearly, there is much more to be discussed. . . .
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] This is not a translation issue. All the major English translations say something similar: “pillar and support of the truth” (NAS); “pillar and buttress of the truth” (ESV); “support and bulwark of the truth” (NET); “pillar and foundation of the truth” (NLT); “pillar and ground of the truth” (NKJ); “pillar and bulwark of the truth” (NRS).
Some of you hate the church. Some of you love the church and believe that yours is the best! Some of you have been hurt by the church. Some of you have done the hurting.
For many, the church represents intolerance, hatred, and judgmentalism. It is likely quite accurate to say that most of those outside the church will have nothing to do with it.
Some of those who are now outside the church used to be in it! But their pain, their emptiness, the abuse has been too much. They are done with it (to which I say, “I’m sorry. I understand. And I hope that this series of posts will represent a voice for you.”).
Others have chosen to remain on the inside, but are seriously asking: Can I just quit on this church thing? Can’t I just be a good Christ-follower without ever having to set foot in a church again?
BTW: If you are a Christian in the West and do not know what I mean, please wake up!
The reality is that we have been asking these questions for years now, but it seems that Covid has helped accelerate the process. After all, many haven’t been to a church for almost 2 years now and their faith has been fine—maybe even better. Why, then, should they go back?
I know that many of us want to give up on the church. We want to quit. We believe that we could do more good outside the church than we could inside it!
The problem is: this is not possible.
NB: I am not saying that you must be connected to a particular church in order to do the Lord’s work. The problem is much more complicated than this and the answers must be carefully nuanced. Allow me to explain.
What is the church?
One of the problems that we are confronted with here is that we may not even be thinking of the same thing when we ask the question.
-
Some may be thinking of a local church (which may be a positive or a negative thing):
- And even here you may not be thinking of the same thing.
- Some are thinking of a Catholic church; others of an evangelical, mega-church; and others of a small community church.
- Others may be thinking of the global body of Christ.
Statements such as—”the church is corrupt, the whole thing; they are all bad”—may be true or false depending on what you mean.
Let me begin our inquiry by positing a question: “What is the pillar and foundation of the truth?”
Now, I have asked this question of biblical scholars and theologians and rarely do I get a correct answer. Some are simply stumped by the question and do not even attempt an answer for fear they might get it wrong. Others are quick to offer up an answer–an answer which by evangelical standards must certainly be correct–“the Bible.” Sorry, incorrect.
NB: If “the Bible” were the correct answer, we would have a problem of a different kind—namely, how do you know what it means? And, who says your answer is correct? (And we could go on—sounds like a topic for my next series of posts)
The answer to the question is found in 1 Tim 3:15. Paul, right after detailing the requirements for being a pastor and a deacon (1 Tim 3:1-13), says,
“Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim 3:14-15 NIV).
The church, says Paul, is the household of God and is the pillar and foundation of the truth.[1] This is probably not what most people think when they consider the church.
Yet, the Church is more than this. In the letter to the Ephesians, he says that the Church is the mystery of God: “. . . that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.”
The mystery of God, Paul says, is that the nations (Gentiles) have become included into the people of God. Thus, Ephesians 3 adds, the Church is the embodiment of God’s mysterious work.
If this were not enough to establish the importance of the Church, we might add that the church is also that for which Christ died! As Ephesians 5 says, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her” (Eph 5:25).
We can’t give up on the Church
So, if you are ready to give up on the church, I understand. But we can’t. To give up on it is to fail to recognize what it is: it is the body of Christ on the earth.
This is why, in my last two posts (click here and here), I noted that taking communion in an “unworthy” manner likely means doing so while sinning against one another.
We can’t give up on the Church. In fact, we too must love the Church for which Christ died.
NB: This doesn’t mean that if you have been abused or have suffered at a church, you must go running back. Not at all. Clearly, there is much more to be discussed. . . .
To receive auto-updates when new posts go live sign up for the newsletter on the top right-hand side of the homepage.
NB: My goal is to keep these posts free of charge. I do not intend to ever hide them behind a paywall. I can only do this if those of you who have been blessed by them and can afford to give ($5, $10, $25, or more/month) do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app simply download the “tithe.ly church” app on your smartphone and insert “determinetruth” as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the “blog” icon and they will automatically load.
[1] This is not a translation issue. All the major English translations say something similar: “pillar and support of the truth” (NAS); “pillar and buttress of the truth” (ESV); “support and bulwark of the truth” (NET); “pillar and foundation of the truth” (NLT); “pillar and ground of the truth” (NKJ); “pillar and bulwark of the truth” (NRS).