“I believe that many who find that 'nothing happens' when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a tough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.”
C.S. Lewis - Introduction to "On the Incarnation" by St. Athanasius
03.25.07
Posted in Food at 6:46 pm by Adam B.
Since food is relational and spiritual it is not unreasonable that churches should use food for ministry. This goes way beyond food banks for the poor, and pizza to lure in youth on Wednesday nights. While I will not get into all the particulars about how food can be used for relational and spiritual development, I do have this do say: Do not abuse the gift. You all know what I am referring to… the potluck.
Have you ever noticed that all potlucks smell the same? It doesn’t matter what state you are in, the denomination, or the time of year, all potlucks have that same smell. There are other things in life that are an amalgamation of random variety that share this feature with the potluck. All garbages smell strangely similar. Unkempt public restrooms all share a common stench, even though the overwhelming fragrance proceeds from refuse composed of a unique plurality of edibles.
The lesson for potlucks is clear, the common stench is a warning of disfavor. How could disfavor extend to food you ask? This is unclear even to me, but the existence of a definite potluck smell is undeniable. “Well,†you might say, “don’t all fast food places smell the same?†You are right, of course, but for different reasons. All hamburger places smell the same because they all make the same food. A KFC does not smell like a McDonalds, however, and a Taco Bell smells different than both. That is what we should expect from food. When you get home you know what to expect for dinner based on the aroma. Every food has this earmark, or fingerprint if you will, that declares its distinctiveness before the food can be seen or tasted. In this way every food is given an identity and personality. Potlucks strip all food of its identifying aroma, of its dignity really, by exuding an oder that is neither pleasant nor distinctive. As it is with the garbage, so with the potluck. Can we really expect these efforts to be blessed?
Food, one of the greatest gifts to mankind, a symbol of our unity, our glory, our distinctiveness, yea even our very souls, has been taken by the church and profaned in the potluck. Repent, I plead, and turn from your casseroles and gelatinous creations. Make foods in keeping with good taste and flavor. If food is relational what are we saying to our friends and neighbors when we invite them to church and offer them overdone Mostacholi à la bland with a side of 15 layer Jell-o dessert? Are there no cooks in the House, are we without culinary prowess? Do we think that, since everyone eats, anything will suffice? Maybe, since everyone breathes, we should poison our air too… but, as we have noted, the potluck has this covered as well. Perhaps I am looking at this all wrong. Maybe churches believe potlucks are a way of suffering for the Name. While we suffer, yes, no glory will be gained for our efforts. No. I say it again No! Food is a gift. Let us not reprobate, violate, or desecrate it any longer. What have we done? Where is our soul? Will we ever recover from this fall?
Permalink
03.23.07
Posted in Food at 9:20 am by Adam B.
Food is relational, food is spiritual. What was the first role of man? Gardener. It may be true, in a manner of speaking, that we were created to worship God, but according to the text we were made to grow food to eat. The first perversion of God’s great creation was accomplished through eating. Eternal life is secured by eating from the tree of life. When sacrifices were made at the temple the priests and the offerer often ate of the sacrifice. They could eat anything but the fat, which was for God. In one of the most heinous acts in scripture the sons of the high priest ate from the meat of sacrifices before all the fat had boiled off. God became so angry at this sin (they also caused the people offering the sacrifice to eat the fat as well) that Israel lost the ark of the covenant for a time.
In his own day people saw that Jesus loved eating. John the Baptist may have had a taste for locust but the Son of Man came “eating and drinking.†How many times has it been pointed out that Jesus was at a wedding when he performed his first miracle? A wedding feast in fact. He made sure they didn’t run out of wine. Two times he provided bread for thousands of people to eat. It seems he talked about food so often the disciples misunderstood when he told them to avoid the yeast of the Pharisees, they took him literally. He even opened up the entire realm of food for all people when he declared that pigs and other such animals were no longer unclean. When Jesus was tempted what was the first tactic? Bread. It would be blasphemous to say that Jesus was gluttonous but the imagery of food surrounding his ministries and promises is profound. Most Sundays we celebrate the Lord’s Supper and even this is based on the Feast of Unleavened Bread. God’s most profound truth can be found in the accidents of wine and bread. While eating this last meal with his disciples Jesus made them a promise, “I will not eat it again until it is fulfilled in the Kingdom of Godâ€. Eating is a kingdom activity! What is the first thing we will do in heaven? Celebrate at the wedding feast. Food and images of food open and close the pages of history and attend nearly every significant promise made to mankind.
Permalink
03.21.07
Posted in Food at 3:40 pm by Adam B.
I used to ask myself, “Why dinner and a movie?” If you want to impress a girl take her to a theme park, or sky diving or somewhere you can use a gun. Why something so ordinary? Dinner…everybody eats dinner. I figured you should do something that shows her a little bit of who you are. If you are a ninja, walk her down a dark alley in the middle of the night so she can see you beat the cuss out of someone trying to rob you. If you are a barber, cut her hair. A police officer, arrest her kid brother.
As I grew older I saw the flaw in my understanding: as much as men like to show off, women are not impressed. As a general principle, comfort rules… hence, the ordinary. Everybody eats. If that is too uncomfortable, see a show. That way you don’t even have to look at each other, or talk. Its perfect. If it’s a good movie, say, Breakfast at Tiffany’s, or The Departed (best picture this year by the Academy), your golden.
Then again, the highlight of a really good date is the dinner, not the movie. The movie is just an easy way out in case you’re a fool and you took her to an all you can eat that didn’t include a salad bar. Food is the substance of relationships. When you first start dating you lie with food, “I’ll just have a something light.” The day after the wedding that salad is going to become lobster with a side of steak. At a job interview you can impress with food. My genius brother, Jason, deliberately ordered spaghetti at an important interview… and got the job. Why? They were impressed that he could eat such a messy dish without fear. Brilliant! The way we eat can tell a lot about who we are. The first time my brother (Jason again) introduced my parents to his wife to be, Cheri, my mother ordered the biggest dish and was the only one to clean her plate. Then she finished all the food left on Cheri’s plate… after polishing off the remains of my dad’s entrée. “You gonna eat that?” If Cheri was paying attention, and I know she was, she could have learned a lot about her future mother in law from that meal. Don’t say you weren’t warned. (The point here, for those of you who do not know my mother, is not that she eats a lot, but that she says and does whatever is on her mind, regardless of how it appears. Not a bad trait in a mother… unless you care about privacy or being embarrassed in public, which, by the way, home grown Bottigs do not.)
The TV program Everybody Loves Raymond (ELR) understood the important connection between food and relationships. In this show everyone is always eating, taking real bites and swallowing, sincere ingestion. They eat so much they must come hungry or they could never finish filming before they are all too stuffed to deliver their lines. Raymond’s mother in the show, Marie, is often the focal point of the food fetish. Every time Raymond comes over she offers him food. When she is upset with him she takes away his food. To show she is proud of him, concerned for him, thinking of him, she makes food. This extends to the other members of the family as well. Robert, the less loved son, often has food taken away from him and given to Ray. The writers of the show, understanding this metaphor for life we call eating, demonstrate that Robert is a little crazy by making him touch food to his chin when he eats. When Ray and Robert’s parents meet Amy’s (Amy eventually marries Robert) parents for the first time they are accepting until they find out a horrible truth. Amy’s dad has never eaten a muffin. “What kind of a man has never had a muffin?” The conclusion: he must be certifiable. This importance of food is demonstrated in Ray’s wife Debra as well. Marie is never fully satisfied with her as a good wife for her son because she can’t cook. In one episode, however, Debra makes braciole and it is surprisingly good. Marie’s husband, Frank, even sneaks over to Ray’s house to eat it so Marie doesn’t find out. Normally a sour spirit, he becomes eloquent over Debra’s dish. Handing her some flowers for the privilege of partaking in this delight he says, “Anyone who can cook braciole like this deserves a hillside full of heavenly scented marigolds and daffodils.” It may seem out of character to anyone with a less intimate knowledge of the characters and the role of food in the show, but on ELR food is life and joy and the substance of relationships. Marie finds Frank cheating on her (by eating Debra’s cooking) and she is deeply wounded. It turns out that braciole is the dish she used to win his love. He married her with the intention that “she would cook for no one else but me!” Food is a basic element of fidelity. At the end of this episode he renews his love for her, “Marie, a man needs more than braciole… he needs lasagna, soups… manicotti” and they embrace.
Food is relational.
Permalink
03.20.07
Posted in Reflections at 9:05 am by Adam B.
In my Greek class our teacher gives us important and controversial passages to translate. Consequently, we have read several portions about women’s role in church. My teacher believes these passages do not apply to our situation in the US, but could apply to a modern day situation where women are still culturally under the authority of men. He believes that Paul follows culture concerning the role of women to keep the church from offending culture so that the gospel can be heard without offense. He says the church should always keep in step with the cultures views on women (in this regard) and those views should be reflected in the church, whether women are considered equal with men in terms of authority or not.
Personally this view makes me nervous because I find it troubling that Paul would leave something so important to the whim of culture. What I appreciate about this view is that it acknowledges the weaknesses of the other views that try to remain biblical but still reject what Paul teaches for today.
One view on women that I think cannot be sustained is that the role of women described in 1 Timothy 2 is limited to the very specific situation in that church at the time. Some have argued that something weird was happening there that made Paul write what he did. Usually this abnormality is described as a group of women in the church were teaching false doctrine. In response to this Paul says, “I will not allow a woman to teach.” What he really meant, in this view, is, “I would not allow any of these women to teach.” This view cannot be sustained because just before these verses Paul says (in the imperative or command form) “Let women learn in silence”. He cannot mean “these women” because he says the exact same thing in 1 Corinthians. In fact, Paul’s view on women is consistent wherever he brings them up. No matter where they are discussed they are always under the authority of men. This was not a specific instance in Timothy but at least a broader cultural dynamic, and possibly more.
Interestingly enough our professor also grouped Romans 5 in with this reading. This passage compares Adam to Christ. I had a talk with our youth group about this passage once. The question I posed was, “Why did God make one man first and then make woman from the man?” They came up with a host of answers, some typical, some not. “It was so that man would know he needed women.” “It was to show his distinction from the animals.” “Woman was an after-thought.” “It was to show man’s inheirent authority over women.” “It was so the woman wouldn’t give the animals lame names.”
Paul makes the argument in Romans 5 that man was created as one so that sin could be traced to a single person. God did not create male and female in the beginning, he made Adam and all humanity came from him. Consequently he is responsible for the sin and judgment on all mankind. “For through one man sin entered the world and death through sin.” Even though Eve ate first Adam is the one responsible as the fountain head of the entire human race. You can see this in Genesis and you can see it here in Romans 5. It is good that sin came through one man because that opened the door for salvation to come through one man as well. Some have said that it does not make sense that Christ can die for the sin of all since he is only one man. Paul argues that this makes perfect sense because it is the result of one man’s sin that we are in this mess to begin with. In the economy and justice of God He had planned from the start our redemption and so ordered the world that redemption could be made through one man, Jesus Christ.
I am not sure how much we should make of this when we consider the role of women. Paul brings up this point in 1 Timothy 2 when he says, “Adam was made first, then Eve.” In his mind the fact that Adam was made first applies directly to the role of women in the Church. This is rarely discussed today, but I think the discussion should be renewed. If it concerns our salvation perhaps it concerns the way we live as well.
Permalink
03.19.07
Posted in Reflections at 8:24 am by Adam B.
Jonah 2:1 Jonah prayed to the LORD his God from the stomach of the fish.
It’s not exactly a closet, but at least its private.
It seems from this passage that Jonah could not swim. He continually talks of his distress, but this distress is not being swallowed by a fish but that of drowning.
Jonah 2:5-6 Seaweed was wrapped around my head. I went down to the very bottoms of the mountains;
It is in the despair of drowning that he calls out to God. It is interesting that there is no confession. Even still, it is never a good idea to make too much out of the absence of any expected device in a story, although it can make for a great sermon. “What are the three things Jonah, the lazy prophet, didn’t do in the whale? Confess his sin, raise his hands when he prayed, give his tithe. Since we don’t want to be like Jonah we should do these things.” In a certain way Jonah confessed his sin before the sailors in the previous chapter and accepted responsibility for that sin by being cast overboard. A dangerous proposition for a man who apparently couldn’t swim.
My favorite verse is 7
When my life was ebbing away, I called out to the LORD, and my prayer came to your holy temple.
On the brink of suffocation he called out to God. I wonder what kind of hope a man can have when he has sunk like a rock to the bottom of the ocean? Is true faith acting here, or desperation? Is there any difference when one cries out to God for mercy?
In God’s mercy he heard Jonah’s prayer all the way from the temple. Not even Solomon believed that God lived in the temple, but it is normal for an OT believer to address his prayers to God either in the temple or toward the temple (or toward the Holy City when the temple was destroyed). On one hand they believed that God is everywhere and at the same time they saw that he gave special attention to those who prayed in/toward his temple. Considering that God has taken up residence in us (he has tabernacled in us) that gives us special privilege to appeal to God on our own behalf and for others.
The Lord answered Jonah by having him swallowed by a fish. Salvation belongs to our God, but it is not always pretty.
Permalink
03.16.07
Posted in Worship at 2:57 pm by Adam B.
Psalm 107:22 Let them present thank offerings, and loudly proclaim what he has done!
What can be done to thank the Lord when he has heard our distress? As a 21st century believer I have no outlet for my joy, no work I can do to show my deepest gratitude. In former days a thank offering could be brought to the Lord, a sacrifice not demanded by the law but given when a worshiper felt overwhelming awe at the work of God. I have no goat or cattle, I have no cakes made without yeast and there is no altar or priest to officiate on my behalf. All these things were a shadow of things to come, but now, at the fulfillment of the age, I am at a loss. How can I say “Thank you”?
In the psalms when people were in distress they made vows to the Lord. “If you get me out of this I will… for you.” It sounds a little shallow to our ears. After all, what can we offer to God? As I have studied these psalms I have been struck by how often the vow is a simple, “I will praise you.”
Psalm 22:21-22 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions; save me from the horns of the wild oxen. I will declare your name to my brothers; in the congregation I will praise you.
These vows are not haphazardly placed in the psalms, nor are they hollow promises made in distress. When a psalmist says he will praise the Lord he means he will tell others how the Lord has rescued him in this specific situation. The praise is not general, but specific. In psalm 34 David praises the Lord for his deliverance from Abimelech. He proclaims the Lord’s might in the situation and then encourages his hearers to put their trust in God.
Psalm 34:4,5 I sought the LORD, and he answered me; he delivered me from all my fears. Those who look to him are radiant; their faces are never covered with shame.
So I, in my life in the year 2007, having no goat and no vow (for fear I might forget to fulfill it), can still declare the mighty works of the Lord witnessed in these days.
——————————
Surly the Lord is a Father to the orphan
A helper to the helpless and a deliverer to those in bondage
His arm is not too short to save
not to short to reach his child in Guatemala
I cried out to the Lord against injustice
I prayed to the Lord and he was not deaf
We cried out to the Lord from our despair
For our arms could not reach her
She was abducted in the night by armed men
A child, a babe under the care of your covenant
Stolen with her sisters from caring hands
Stolen to be sold or discarded
Oh the wickedness of men, what perversity and scorn
Men who have neither heard your law nor know your Son
Do not destroy them in your anger
In your justice may mercy follow close behind
I sought you that day
We mourned in the night
When we awoke our hearts were heavy with tears
I sought you that day
We mourned in the night
When we awoke the sun shone bright
You took captive captivity to release us from fear
You were sold as a slave to release us from bondage
You walked among us and carried our pain
You are not ashamed to call us brothers
Jesus, your wonders never cease
And when we awoke the Son shone bright
The news of her deliverance was not slow in coming
She was returned with two of her sisters
Even three of her sisters felt the overflow of grace
Poured out on your beloved child
Let all the miserable and broken hear this
The Lord lives
Let all the wicked and mockers hear this
The Lord lives
Let all the fatherless hear this
The Lord is by your side
Let all who love his Son hear this
Our Lord lives, our Lord hears
The Lord is mighty to save.
—————————–
Two stories were written about this incident in the local news paper. Article 1 Article 2
In addition, updates have been made on the Western Seminary Alumni page, for the dates March 16th, and two posts on March 14th.
Permalink
03.12.07
Posted in Reflections at 8:29 am by Adam B.
The book of Jonah does not look favorably on its namesake. It seems like everyone in the story is better at listening to God than he, even the pagans manning the ship he is using to sail away from the command of God. Few preachers, I’m sure, have made much of the parallel of Jonah and Jesus sleeping in the bottom of a boat. Jesus does say that the people will receive the sign of Jonah, but I am sure that’s not what he meant.
You have to love the sailors in this story. They know a god has caused the violent storm they are in and they do everything in their power to appease this god. They also do everything humanly speaking to conquer the storm. They lighten the ship and they try to row for shore, but nothing works. You cannot resist the Lord, or as the sailors say, “After all, you, LORD, have done just as you pleased.” This is a major theme in Jonah, the freedom of God and the futility of resistance. When they threw Jonah overboard and the storm subsided they were gripped with a terrible fear (fearing they feared, literally) and they made vows to the Lord. Don’t think these are wimpy modern worship vows either (I will give you everything… until I walk out the door), these people truly feared God for they had seen his destructive power. I am sure they lived up to their vows.
The sailors made me laugh when they spoke to Jonah. They knew when he got on board that he had fled from the presence of the Lord. No big deal. Who cares what conflicts one man has with his own God. However, when the lot falls to Jonah they ask him, “who do you worship?” Jonah tells them that his God is the Lord of the land and the sea. Their response is classic, “What have you done?” Sure, when this was just some normal wimpy personal god it was no big deal, but his god is causing a violent storm that is about to destroy them. He is not just Jonah’s personal god/servant, he is the God of the land and the sea. Idiot! You don’t flee from a sea god on a boat! What was he thinking? In fact, Jonah had no where to go. Even if they had made it to shore they would not have saved their lives. His god was the god of the land as well. Jonah, you fool, did you not know whom you serve?
Is there a lesson here for us?
Permalink